Minimally invasive abdominal cerclage compared to laparotomy: a comparison of surgical and obstetric outcomes

The objective of this study is to report surgical and obstetric outcomes of patients following abdominal cerclage placement through either minimally invasive or open techniques. Subjects of this retrospective cohort study were patients at two referral centers specializing in high-risk pregnancy and minimally invasive gynecologic surgery. Electronic medical records of all patients who underwent abdominal cerclage placement between December 2011 and December 2015 at Yale New Haven Hospital and Bridgeport Hospital were reviewed. The patients included were women who underwent abdominal cerclage placement either during pregnancy or prior to conception. One cohort of women had their abdominal cerclage placed using traditional laparoscopy or robotic-assisted laparoscopy. The other cohort consisted of women whose abdominal cerclage was placed through laparotomy. Electronic medical charts were reviewed to collect baseline demographic and pre-procedure obstetric information, as well as surgical and subsequent obstetric outcomes. Eleven minimally invasive and nine open abdominal cerclages were performed during the study period. Seven of the minimally invasive and two open cerclages were done outside of pregnancy. Average operative time was longer in the minimally invasive cohort. Estimated blood loss was typically lower in the minimally invasive group. Length of hospital stay was shorter in the minimally invasive group. Obstetric outcomes were similar between the two cohorts, with a total of nine live births in the minimally invasive group and seven live births in the open group. Minimally invasive abdominal cerclage is a safe alternative when performed by a surgeon with appropriate training and technical skills, and obstetric outcomes are comparable to those after open abdominal cerclage.