Favorable Surgical and Obstetric Outcomes in Pre- and Postconceptional Laparoscopic Abdominal Cerclage: A Large Multicenter Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Cervical incompetence is an important cause of extreme preterm delivery. Without specialized treatment, cervical incompetence has a 30% chance of recurrence in a subsequent pregnancy. Recently the first randomized controlled trial showed significant superiority of the abdominal cerclage compared to both a high and low vaginal cerclage in preventing preterm delivery <32 weeks of gestational age and fetal loss in patients with a prior failed vaginal cerclage.

OBJECTIVE(S): To assess surgical and obstetric outcomes in patients with pre- and postconceptional laparoscopic abdominal cerclage placement. Furthermore, to perform subgroup analysis based on the indication for cerclage placement in order to identify patients that benefit the most from an abdominal cerclage.

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective multicenter cohort study with consecutive inclusion of all eligible patients from 1997 onwards in the Dutch cohort (104 patients) and from 2007 onwards in the Boston cohort (169 patients) was conducted. Eligible patients suffered from at least one second- or third-trimester fetal loss because of cervical incompetence and/or a short or absent cervix after cervical surgery. This includes loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP), conization or trachelectomy. Patients were divided into subgroups based on the indication for cerclage placement: 1) prior failed vaginal cerclage 2) prior cervical surgery 3) other indications. This third group consisted of patients with a history of multiple second- or early third-trimester fetal losses based on cervical incompetence (without a failed vaginal cerclage) and/or multiple dilation and curettage procedures. The primary outcome measure was delivery at ≥34 weeks of gestation with neonatal survival at hospital discharge. Secondary outcome measures included surgical and obstetric outcomes, such as pregnancy rates after preconceptional surgery, obstetric complications and fetal survival rates.

RESULTS: A total of 273 patients were included; 250 patients in the preconceptional cohort and 23 patients in the postconceptional cohort. Surgical outcomes of 273 patients were favorable with six minor complications (2.2%). In the postconceptional cohort we had one patient (0.4%) with hemorrhage of 650 ml, resulting in conversion to laparotomy. After preconceptional laparoscopic abdominal cerclage (n=250) the pregnancy rate was 74.1% (n=137) with a minimal follow-up of 12 months. Delivery at ≥ 34 weeks of gestation occurred in 90.5% of all ongoing pregnancies. Four patients (3.3%) suffered from a second-trimester fetal loss. The indication for the cerclage in all four patients was a prior failed vaginal cerclage. The other subgroups showed fetal survival rates of 100% in ongoing pregnancies with a total fetal survival rate of 96%. After postconceptional placement, 94.1% of all patients with an ongoing pregnancy delivered at ≥ 34 weeks of gestation with a total fetal survival rate of 100%. Thus second-trimester fetal losses did not occur in this group.

CONCLUSION(S): Pre- and postconceptional laparoscopic abdominal cerclage is a safe procedure with favorable obstetric outcomes in patients with an increased risk of cervical incompetence. All subgroups show high fetal survival rates. Second-trimester fetal loss only occurred in the group of patients with a cerclage placed for the indication prior failed vaginal cerclage, but also in this group the chance was low.