Is There Utility in Transvaginal Cervical Length Surveillance After Cerclage Placement for the Prediction of Spontaneous Preterm Birth?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Transvaginal cervical length (TVCL) surveillance post-transvaginal cerclage placement is not universally performed, despite the correlated risk of short TVCL with spontaneous preterm birth (sPTB). This study evaluated if patients with a TVCL <2.5 cm after cerclage placement had higher odds of sPTB than those with a TVCL ≥2.5 cm after cerclage placement. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included patients with a singleton, non-anomalous gestation with a transvaginal cerclage who had TVCL surveillance post-cerclage placement. The primary outcome was the odds of sPTB among patients with TVCL <2.5 cm vs TVCL ≥2.5 cm after cerclage placement. Transvaginal cerclage placement indications included history indicated, physical exam indicated, and ultrasound indicated. Outcomes were assessed using univariate and multivariate analysis while adjusting for progesterone use, TVCL before cerclage placement, and cerclage indication. RESULTS: The analysis included 210 patients, and the sPTB rate was 46.7%. Those with sPTB underwent cerclage placement at later gestational ages, had higher rates of exam-indicated cerclage, and were more likely to be prescribed vaginal progesterone. Patients with a TVCL of <2.5 cm after cerclage placement did not have significantly increased odds of sPTB (OR: 2.8, 95% CI: 0.9-8.7, p=0.07); however, patients with a TVCL <2.0 cm had significantly increased odds of sPTB (OR: 6.3, 95% CI: 2.2-18.8, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: In patients with transvaginal cerclage, there does not appear to be increased odds of sPTB with TVCL <2.5 cm after cerclage placement; however, there does appear to be an increased odds of sPTB in patients with a TVCL of <2.0 cm after cerclage placement.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".