Literature DB >> 2196494

Measurement of cervical length in pregnancy: comparison between vaginal ultrasonography and digital examination.

J D Sonek1, J D Iams, M Blumenfeld, F Johnson, M Landon, S Gabbe.   

Abstract

Evaluation of the gravid cervix uteri is an important part of prenatal care, especially in the patient at risk for preterm birth. Seeking a method of cervical length measurement that could be used easily regardless of patient habitus, location of the cervix, and gestational age, we used a vaginal probe with a 240 degrees scanning angle in gravidas at various gestational ages to test the theoretical advantages of the wide scanning angle. Among the first 201 examinations, cervical length was measured successfully in 99.5% of cases. This success rate compares favorably with those of abdominal sonography and vaginal sonography using the standard 90 degrees scanning angle sector probes. We also compared this method with digital examination in a double-blind fashion. Only a fair degree of association between sonographic cervical measurements and measurements obtained by digital examination was found, reflected in a correlation coefficient of 0.49.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2196494

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  14 in total

1.  Transabdominal evaluation of uterine cervical length during pregnancy fails to identify a substantial number of women with a short cervix.

Authors:  Edgar Hernandez-Andrade; Roberto Romero; Hyunyoung Ahn; Youssef Hussein; Lami Yeo; Steven J Korzeniewski; Tinnakorn Chaiworapongsa; Sonia S Hassan
Journal:  J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med       Date:  2012-03-16

2.  The utility of fetal fibronectin in the prediction and prevention of spontaneous preterm birth.

Authors:  Daniel G Kiefer; Anthony M Vintzileos
Journal:  Rev Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008

3.  Comparison of the POP-Q examination, transvaginal ultrasound, and direct anatomic measurement of cervical length.

Authors:  Christina E Dancz; Lisa Werth; Vanessa Sun; Sandy Lee; Daphne Walker; Begüm Özel
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2013-10-30       Impact factor: 2.894

4.  Management of pregnancies with cervical shortening: a very short cervix is a very big problem.

Authors:  Hee Joong Lee; Tae Chul Park; Errol R Norwitz
Journal:  Rev Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2009

5.  Relationship between detection of the cervical gland area during the late third trimester and necessity for induction of labor to prevent post-term delivery.

Authors:  Yukito Minami; Takao Sekiya; Haruki Nishizawa; Jun Miyazaki; Yoshiteru Noda; Risa Ishii; Akira Yasue; Eiji Nishio; Yasuhiro Udagawa; Takuma Fujii
Journal:  J Med Ultrason (2001)       Date:  2014-06-17       Impact factor: 1.314

Review 6.  Is sonographic assessment of the cervix necessary and helpful?

Authors:  Joel D Larma; Jay D Iams
Journal:  Clin Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 2.190

7.  Cervical funneling: effect on gestational length and ultrasound-indicated cerclage in high-risk women.

Authors:  Melissa S Mancuso; Jeff M Szychowski; John Owen; Gary Hankins; Jay D Iams; Jeanne S Sheffield; Annette Perez-Delboy; Vincenzo Berghella; Debora A Wing; Edwin R Guzman
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 8.661

8.  Transvaginal cervical length and tobacco use in Appalachian women: association with increased risk for spontaneous preterm birth.

Authors:  Joseph Findley; Dara J Seybold; Mike Broce; Dolly Yadav; Byron C Calhoun
Journal:  W V Med J       Date:  2015 May-Jun

9.  Preterm prediction study: comparison of the cervical score and Bishop score for prediction of spontaneous preterm delivery.

Authors:  R B Newman; R L Goldenberg; J D Iams; P J Meis; B M Mercer; A H Moawad; E Thom; M Miodovnik; S N Caritis; M Dombrowski
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 7.661

Review 10.  Additional effects of the cervical length measurement in women with preterm contractions: a systematic review.

Authors:  Jolande Y Vis; Rosanna A Kuin; William A Grobman; Ben Willem J Mol; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Brent C Opmeer
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2011-04-12       Impact factor: 2.344

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.