Guideline:
Cervical insufficiency
Bibliographic Source(s)
- American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Cervical insufficiency. Washington (DC): American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG); 2003 Nov. 9 p. (ACOG practice bulletin; no. 48). [56 references]
Guideline Status
This is the current release of the guideline.
Guideline Category
Management
Screening
Intended Users
Physicians
Guideline Objective(s)
- To aid practitioners in making decisions about appropriate obstetric and gynecologic care
- To provide a review of current evidence on cervical insufficiency including screening of asymptomatic at-risk women and offer management guidelines
Target Population
Pregnant women with cervical insufficiency
Interventions and Practices Considered
Diagnosis/Evaluation/Screening
- Patient history including history of diethylstilbestrol exposure
- Ultrasonography (routine ultrasound screening not recommended)
- Patient selection for cerclage based on history of cervical insufficiency
Management/Treatment
- Frequent examination
- Counseling
- Cerclage (Shirodkar and McDonald procedures transabdominal cervicoisthmic cerclage)
- Perioperative antibiotics and tocolytics with caution
Major Outcomes Considered
- Sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound screening of the cervix
- Duration of gestation
- Neonatal morbidity and mortality
- Rate of bacterial infection
- Incidence of complications with cerclage placement
Methods Used to Collect/Select Evidence
Hand-searches of Published Literature (Primary Sources)
Hand-searches of Published Literature (Secondary Sources)
Searches of Electronic Databases
Description of Methods used to Collect/Select the Evidence
The MEDLINE database the Cochrane Library and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' own internal resources and documents were used to conduct a literature search to locate relevant articles published between January 1985 and July 2003. The search was restricted to articles published in the English language. Priority was given to articles reporting results of original research although review articles and commentaries also were consulted. Abstracts of research presented at symposia and scientific conferences were not considered adequate for inclusion in this document. Guidelines published by organizations or institutions such as the National Institutes of Health and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists were reviewed and additional studies were located by reviewing bibliographies of identified articles.
Number of Source Documents
Not stated
Methods Used to Assess the Quality and Strength of the Evidence
Weighting According to a Rating Scheme (Scheme Given)
Rating Scheme for the Strength of the Evidence
Studies were reviewed and evaluated for quality according to the method outlined by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force:
I: Evidence obtained from at least one properly designed randomized controlled trial.
II-1: Evidence obtained from well-designed controlled trials without randomization.
II-2: Evidence obtained from well-designed cohort or case–control analytic studies preferably from more than one center or research group.
II-3: Evidence obtained from multiple time series with or without the intervention. Dramatic results in uncontrolled experiments also could be regarded as this type of evidence.
III: Opinions of respected authorities based on clinical experience descriptive studies or reports of expert committees.
Methods Used to Analyze the Evidence
Systematic Review
Description of the Methods Used to Analyze the Evidence
Not stated
Methods Used to Formulate the Recommendations
Expert Consensus
Description of Methods Used to Formulate the Recommendations
Analysis of available evidence was given priority in formulating recommendations. When reliable research was not available expert opinions from obstetrician–gynecologists were used. See also the "Rating Scheme for the Strength of Recommendations" field regarding Grade C recommendations.
Rating Scheme for the Strength of the Recommendations
Based on the highest level of evidence found in the data recommendations are provided and graded according to the following categories:
Level A — Recommendations are based on good and consistent scientific evidence.
Level B — Recommendations are based on limited or inconsistent scientific evidence.
Level C — Recommendations are based primarily on consensus and expert opinion.
Cost Analysis
A formal cost analysis was not performed and published cost analyses were not reviewed.
Method of Guideline Validation
Internal Peer Review
Description of Method of Guideline Validation
Practice Bulletins are validated by two internal clinical review panels composed of practicing obstetrician-gynecologists generalists and sub-specialists. The final guidelines are also reviewed and approved by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) Executive Board.
Major Recommendations
The grades of evidence (I-III) and levels of recommendation (A-C) are defined at the end of the "Major Recommendations" field
The following recommendations are based on limited or inconsistent scientific evidence (Level B):
- Serial assessments in low-risk women to screen for cervical insufficiency are of low yield and should not be done routinely.
- Serial ultrasound examinations should be considered in a patient with historical risk factors for cervical insufficiency and should be initiated between 16 and 20 weeks of gestation or later.
- An elective cerclage can be considered in a patient with a history of 3 or more unexplained midtrimester pregnancy losses or preterm deliveries.
- Women exposed to diethylstilbestrol (DES) in utero may be evaluated for cervical insufficiency using the same clinical criteria as nonexposed individuals.
The following recommendations are based primarily on consensus and expert opinion (Level C):
- The evaluation of a patient with cervical shortening or funneling should include a comprehensive ultrasonographic assessment of the fetus to rule out anomalies as well as physical and laboratory assessments to rule out labor and chorioamnionitis.
- Given the advances in neonatal care and the potential maternal and fetal morbidity associated with cerclage surgical correction of cervical insufficiency should be limited to pregnancies before fetal viability has been achieved.
Definitions:
Grades of Evidence
I: Evidence obtained from at least one properly designed randomized controlled trial.
II-1: Evidence obtained from well-designed controlled trials without randomization.
II-2: Evidence obtained from well-designed cohort or case–control analytic studies preferably from more than one center or research group.
II-3: Evidence obtained from multiple time series with or without the intervention. Dramatic results in uncontrolled experiments also could be regarded as this type of evidence.
III: Opinions of respected authorities based on clinical experience descriptive studies or reports of expert committees.
Levels of Recommendations
Level A — Recommendations are based on good and consistent scientific evidence.
Level B — Recommendations are based on limited or inconsistent scientific evidence.
Level C — Recommendations are based primarily on consensus and expert opinion.
Clinical Algorithm(s)
None provided
Type of Evidence supporting the Recommendations
The type of supporting evidence is identified and graded for each recommendation (see "Major Recommendations").
Potential Benefits
Appropriate screening and management of cervical insufficiency
Potential Harms
The use of unnecessary antibiotics may lead to the development of resistant strains of bacteria and other morbidity for the woman and her fetus.
Cerclage
- Rupture of membranes chorioamnionitis and suture displacement are the most common complications associated with cerclage placement and their incidence varies widely in relation to the timing and indications for the cerclage.
- Urgent and emergency cerclages are associated with a higher incidence of morbidity as a result of cervical shortening and exposure of the fetal membranes to the vaginal ecosystem.
- Transabdominal cerclage can be complicated by rupture of membranes and chorioamnionitis. It carries the added risk of intraoperative hemorrhage from the uterine veins when the cerclage band is tunneled between the bifurcation of the uterine artery as well as the known risks associated with laparotomy.
- Life-threatening complications of uterine rupture and maternal septicemia are extremely rare but have been reported with all types of cerclage.
Qualifying Statements
These guidelines should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of treatment or procedure. Variations in practice may be warranted based on the needs of the individual patient resources and limitations unique to the institution or type of practice.
Description of Implementation Strategy
An implementation strategy was not provided.
IOM Care Need
Getting Better
Staying Healthy
IOM Domain
Effectiveness
Patient-centeredness
Bibliographic Source(s)
- American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Cervical insufficiency. Washington (DC): American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG); 2003 Nov. 9 p. (ACOG practice bulletin; no. 48). [56 references]
Adaptation
Not applicable: The guideline was not adapted from another source.
Source(s) of Funding
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG)
Guideline Committee
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) Committee on Practice Bulletins-Obstetrics
Composition of Group that Authored the Guideline
Not stated
Financial Disclosures/Conflicts of Interest
Not stated
Guideline Status
This is the current release of the guideline.
Guideline Availability
Electronic copies: None available
Print copies: Available for purchase from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) Distribution Center PO Box 4500 Kearneysville WV 25430-4500; telephone 800-762-2264 ext. 192; e-mail: sales@acog.org. The ACOG Bookstore is available online at the ACOG Web site.
Availability of Companion Documents
None available
Patient Resources
None available
NGC STATUS
This NGC summary was completed by ECRI Institute on October 12 2007. The information was verified by the guideline developer on December 3 2007.
COPYRIGHT STATEMENT
This NGC summary is based on the original guideline which is subject to the guideline developer's copyright restrictions.
NGC Disclaimer
The National Guideline Clearinghouse™ (NGC) does not develop produce approve or endorse the guidelines represented on this site.
All guidelines summarized by NGC and hosted on our site are produced under the auspices of medical specialty societies relevant professional associations public or private organizations other government agencies health care organizations or plans and similar entities.
Guidelines represented on the NGC Web site are submitted by guideline developers and are screened solely to determine that they meet the NGC Inclusion Criteria which may be found at http://www.guideline.gov/about/inclusion.aspx .
NGC AHRQ and its contractor ECRI Institute make no warranties concerning the content or clinical efficacy or effectiveness of the clinical practice guidelines and related materials represented on this site. Moreover the views and opinions of developers or authors of guidelines represented on this site do not necessarily state or reflect those of NGC AHRQ or its contractor ECRI Institute and inclusion or hosting of guidelines in NGC may not be used for advertising or commercial endorsement purposes.
Readers with questions regarding guideline content are directed to contact the guideline developer.
Tools
No Quick Reference tools have been developed.