Management of women with a previous late fetal loss (14 to 22 weeks of gestation);Prise en charge d'un antécédent de fausse couche tardive (14 à 22 SA)

Journal de Gynecologie Obstetrique et Biologie de la Reproduction

Volumn 43, Issue 10, 2014, Pages 856-864

  Capmas, P ^a,b,c   Thellier, E ^a   Carcopino, X ^d,e   Huchon, C ^f,g   Deffieux, X ^h   Fernandez, H ^a,b,c  

^a BICÊTRE HOSPITAL   (France)

^b CENTRE FOR RESEARCH IN EPIDEMIOLOGY AND POPULATION HEALTH   (France)

^c UNIVERSITÉ PARIS SACLAY   (France)

^d HÔPITAL NORD   (France)

^e AIX MARSEILLE UNIVERSITY   (France)

^f CENTRE HOSPITALIER INTERCOMMUNAL   (France)

^g Risques Cliniques et Securite en Sante des Femmes et en Sante Perinatale   (France)

^h HÔPITAL ANTOINE BÉCLÈRE   (France)

Author keywords

Cerclage; Cervical length; Cervico isthmiccerclage; Guidelines; Late pregnancy loss; Pessaire; Progesterone; Uterinemalformation

Indexed keywords

ANTIPHOSPHOLIPID SYNDROME; ARTICLE; CERCLAGE; CERVICAL LENGTH MEASUREMENT; FETUS WASTAGE; FOLLOW UP; GESTATIONAL AGE; HUMAN; MC DONALD CERCLAGE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; ABORTION, SPONTANEOUS; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; FEMALE; FETUS DEATH; PREGNANCY; PREVENTION AND CONTROL; PROCEDURES; SECOND TRIMESTER PREGNANCY; UTERINE CERVIX; UTERINE CERVIX CERCLAGE;

ABORTION, SPONTANEOUS; CERCLAGE, CERVICAL; CERVIX UTERI; FEMALE; FETAL DEATH; HUMANS; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY TRIMESTER, SECOND;

EID: 84920193683     PISSN: 03682315     EISSN: 17730430     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jgyn.2014.09.017     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Delabaere A, Huchon C, Lavoué V, Lejeune V, Iraola E, Nedel-lec S, et al. Standardisation de la terminologie des pertes degrossesse: consensus d'experts du Collège national des gynéco-logues et obstétriciens français (CNGOF). J Gynecol Obstet BiolReprod 2014, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jgyn.2014.09.010.
2. Gream GT. Dilatation or division of cervix uteri. Lancet1865: 381.
3. Edlow AG, Srinivas SK, Elovitz MA. Second trimester loss andsubsequent pregnancy outcomes: what is the real risk? Am JObstet Gynecol 2007; 197: 581 [e1-6].
4. Goldenberg RL, Mayberry SK, Copper RL, Dubard MB, Hauth JC. Pregnancy outcome following a second trimester loss. ObstetGynecol 1993; 81: 444-6.
5. Ancel PY, Saurel-Cubizolles MJ, Di Renzo GC, Papiernik E, BreartG, The Europop Group. Risk factors for 14-21 week abor-tions: a case-control study in Europe. Hum Reprod 2000; 15: 2426-32.
6. Chan YY, Jayaprakasan K, Tan A, Thornton JG, Coomarasamy A, Raine-Fenning NJ. Reproductive outcomes in women withcongenital uterine anomalies: a systematic review. UltrasoundObstet Gynecol 2011; 38: 371-82.
7. Christiansen OB, Nybo Andersen AM, Bosch E, Daya S, Delves PJ, Hviid TV, et al. Evidence-based investigations and treatmentsof recurrent pregnancy loss. Fertil Steril 2005; 83: 821-39.
8. Homer HA, Li TC, Cooke ID. The septate uterus: a reviewof management and reproductive outcome. Fertil Steril2000; 73: 1-14.
9. Litta P, Spiller E, Saccardi C, Ambrosini G, Caserta D, Cosmi E. Resectoscope or Versapoint for hysteroscopic metroplasty. IntJ Gynaecol Obstet 2008; 101: 39-42.
10. Agostini A, De Guibert F, Salari K, Crochet P, Bretelle F, Gamerre M. Adverse obstetric outcomes at term after hysteroscopicmetroplasty. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2009; 16: 454-7.
11. Sentilhes L, Sergent F, Berthier A, Catala L, Descamps P, Marpeau L. Uterine rupture following operative hysteroscopy. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 2006; 34: 1064-70.
12. Giacomucci E, Bellavia E, Sandri F, Farina A, Scagliarini G. Termdelivery rate after hysteroscopic metroplasty in patients withrecurrent spontaneous abortion and T-shaped, arcuate and sep-tate uterus. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2011; 71: 183-8.
13. Fernandez H, Garbin O, Castaigne V, Gervaise A, Levaillant JM. Surgical approach to and reproductive outcome after sur-gical correction of a T-shaped uterus. Hum Reprod 2011; 26: 1730-4.
14. Souza CA, Schmitz C, Genro VK, Martins A, Scheffel C, Oppermann ML, et al. Office hysteroscopy study in conse-cutive miscarriage patients. Rev Assoc Med Bras 2011; 57: 397-401.
15. Ventolini G, Zhang M, Gruber J. Hysteroscopy in the evaluationof patients with recurrent pregnancy loss: a cohort study in aprimary care population. Surg Endosc 2004; 18: 1782-4.
16. Zlatnik FJ, Burmeister LF, Feddersen DA, Brown RC. Radiolo-gic appearance of the upper cervical canal in women with ahistory of premature delivery. II. Relationship to clinical pre-sentation and to tests of cervical compliance. J Reprod Med1989; 34: 525-30.
17. Bergman PSS. Traction test for demonstrating incompetence ofthe internal os of the cervix. Int J Fertil 1957; 2: 163-7.
18. Kiwi R, Neuman MR, Merkatz IR, Selim MA, Lysikiewicz A. Deter-mination of the elastic properties of the cervix. Obstet Gynecol1988; 71: 568-74.
19. Keltz MD, Olive DL, Kim AH, Arici A. Sonohysterogra-phy for screening in recurrent pregnancy loss. Fertil Steril1997; 67: 670-4.
20. Ghi T, Casadio P, Kuleva M, Perrone AM, Savelli L, Giunchi S, et al. Accuracy of three-dimensional ultrasound in diagnosisand classification of congenital uterine anomalies. Fertil Steril2009; 92: 808-13.
21. Salim R, Woelfer B, Backos M, Regan L, Jurkovic D. Reproducibility of three-dimensional ultrasound diagnosis ofcongenital uterine anomalies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol2003; 21: 578-82.
22. Guimaraes Filho HA, Mattar R, Pires CR, Araujo Junior E, Moron AF, Nardozza LM. Comparison of hysterosalpingography, hys-terosonography and hysteroscopy in evaluation of the uterinecavity in patients with recurrent pregnancy losses. Arch Gyne-col Obstet 2006; 274: 284-8.
23. Saravelos SH, Cocksedge KA, Li TC. Prevalence and diagnosis ofcongenital uterine anomalies in women with reproductive fai-lure: a critical appraisal. Hum Reprod Update 2008; 14: 415-29.
24. Nizard J, Guettrot-Imbert G, Plu-Bureau G, Ciangura C, Jac-Queminet S, Leenhardt L. Pathologies maternelles chroniqueset pertes de grossesse. Recommandations françaises. J Gyne-col Obstet Biol Reprod 2014, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jgyn.2014.09.017.
25. Rozenberg P, Gillet A, Ville Y. Transvaginal sonographic exami-nation of the cervix in asymptomatic pregnant women: reviewof the literature. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2002; 19: 302-11.
26. Guzman ER, Walters C, Ananth CV, O'Reilly-Green C, Benito CW, Palermo A, et al. A comparison of sonographic cer-vical parameters in predicting spontaneous preterm birthin high-risk singleton gestations. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol2001; 18: 204-10.
27. Berghella V, Tolosa JE, Kuhlman K, Weiner S, Bolognese RJ, Wapner RJ. Cervical ultrasonography compared with manualexamination as a predictor of preterm delivery. Am J ObstetGynecol 1997; 177: 723-30.
28. Alfirevic Z, Stampalija T, Roberts D, Jorgensen AL. Cervicalstitch (cerclage) for preventing preterm birth in singleton pre-gnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; 4: CD008991.
29. Berghella V, Rafael TJ, Szychowski JM, Rust OA, Owen J. Cerclage for short cervix on ultrasonography in women with sin-gleton gestations and previous preterm birth: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 117: 663-71.
30. MRC/RCOG Working Party on Cervical Cerclage. Final report ofthe Medical Research Council/Royal College of Obstetriciansand Gynaecologists multicentre randomised trial of cervicalcerclage. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1993; 100: 516-23.
31. Zaveri V, Aghajafari F, Amankwah K, Hannah M. Abdominalversus vaginal cerclage after a failed transvaginal cerclage: asystematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 187: 868-72.
32. Deffieux X, de Tayrac R, Louafi N, Gervaise A, Senat MV, Chauveaud-Lambling A, et al. Transvaginal cervico-isthmiccerclage using polypropylene tape: surgical procedure and pre-gnancy outcome: Fernandez's procedure. J Gynecol Obstet BiolReprod 2006; 35: 465-71.
33. Witt MU, Joy SD, Clark J, Herring A, Bowes WA, Thorp JM. Cervico-isthmic cerclage: transabdominal vs. transvaginalapproach. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009; 201: 105 [e1-4].
34. Goya M, Pratcorona L, Merced C, Rodo C, Valle L, Romero A, et al. Cervical pessary in pregnant women with a short cer-vix (PECEP): an open-label randomised controlled trial. Lancet2012; 379: 1800-6.
35. Alfirevic Z, Owen J, Carreras Moratonas E, Sharp AN, Szy-Chowski JM, Goya M. Vaginal progesterone, cerclage or cervicalpessary for preventing preterm birth in asymptomatic singletonpregnant women with a history of preterm birth and a sonogra-phic short cervix. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013; 41: 146-51.
36. Dodd JM, Jones L, Flenady V, Cincotta R, Crowther CA. Prenataladministration of progesterone for preventing preterm birth inwomen considered to be at risk of preterm birth. CochraneDatabase Syst Rev 2013; 7: CD004947.
37. Iams JD. Prevention of preterm parturition. New Engl J Med2014; 370: 1861.
38. Defranco EA, Valent AM, Newman T, Regan J, Smith J, Muglia LJ. Adjunctive therapies to cerclage for the preven-tion of preterm birth: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol Int2013; 2013: 528158.