Cerclage placement in twin pregnancies with cervical dilation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Existing guidelines and studies on the benefits of cerclage in twin pregnancies with a dilated cervix have low reliability and inconsistent conclusions. New randomized control trials and cohort studies focusing on twin pregnancies with cervical insufficiency were published recently. Therefore, this meta-analysis aimed to compare outcomes of cerclage placement and expectant treatment in twin pregnancies with a dilated cervix using recent data.

We screened the PubMed, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Library databases to identify randomized controlled trials and cohort studies comparing maternal and perinatal outcomes of twin pregnancies with cervical dilation, with and without cerclage placement, published until December 2020. Estimates were pooled using random-effects or fixed-effect models depending on the heterogeneity. Mean difference, 95% confidence interval, and relative risk were used to compare the outcomes. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Handbook and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The meta-analyses followed the guidance of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) standard and the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines for systematic reviews of observational studies.

Five studies, comprising 275 twin pregnancies, met the inclusion criteria; of those, 167 underwent cerclage and 108 were expectantly managed. Cerclage placement significantly prolonged the interval from the time of diagnosis to delivery and reduced the incidence of preterm delivery, perinatal death, and complications. The fetal outcomes improved significantly in cases managed with cerclage.

Therefore, emergent cerclage is a potential option for managing twin pregnancies with cervical dilation of at least 1 cm.