Prophylactic Cervical Cerclage (Modified Shirodkar Operation) for Twin and Triplet Pregnancies After Fertility Treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Multiple pregnancy rates have increased in the recent years mainly due to an increase in the number of assisted reproduction cycles performed. These pregnancies are associated with maternal and perinatal complications. These complications may arise due to premature delivery. This clinical study was performed in order to assess the effectiveness of prophylactic vaginal cervical cerclage in multiple pregnancies. Methods: A modified Shirodkar method was applied in twin and triplet pregnancies conceived by fertility treatments, at 13 to 14 weeks of gestation. The suture was fully embedded under the vaginal mucosa in order to avoid the risk of infection. Results: Our cohort of patients included 31 women with twin and five with triplet pregnancies. The mean gestational age for twins and triplets was 35 + 4 and 33 + 6 and the mean birthweight was 2,267 g and 1,820 g, respectively. Nearly half of the twins and all of the triplets delivered were admitted in the neonatal intensive care unit. Only one neonate had a very low birth weight. No significant differences were noted in the effect of different fertility techniques in the outcome measures studied. Conclusions: Multiple pregnancies conceived with the aid of fertility treatment benefited from the prophylactic application of a prophylactic cervical vaginal cerclage. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4021/jcgo143w
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".