Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 19, 2025
Laparoscopic Non-Mesh Cerclage Pectopexy for Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Published on: September 13, 2022
Perioperative complications of a transvaginal cervical cerclage in singleton pregnancies: a systematic review and
Charlotte E van Dijk1, Sofie H Breuking1, Sophie Jansen1
1Amsterdam Reproduction and Development Research Institute, Department of Obstetrics, Amsterdam University Medical Center (UMC), University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Objective:
Given that many studies report on a limited spectrum of adverse events of transvaginal cervical cerclage for preventing preterm birth, but are not powered to draw conclusions about its safety, the objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review with pooled risk analyses of perioperative complications and compare characteristics on the basis of indication for cerclage in singleton pregnancies.
Data Sources:
Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the prospective trial registers ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched from inception to April 2020.
Study Eligibility Criteria:
All randomized controlled trials and both retrospective and prospective observational cohort studies reporting about complications in history-indicated cerclage, ultrasound-indicated cerclage, or physical examination-indicated cerclage were eligible. Studies were included if they contained original data on the occurrence of adverse events during surgery or within 24 hours after surgery.
Methods:
The Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized controlled trials and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for cohort and case-control studies were used for the critical appraisal. The pooled risk assessment was conducted using meta and metafor packages in R (studio), version 4.0.3.
Results:
The search yielded 2328 potential studies; 3 randomized controlled trials, 3 prospective, and 38 retrospective cohort studies were included in the final analysis. Of the 4511 women with singleton gestations, 1561 (34.6%) underwent history-indicated cerclage, 1348 (29.9%) underwent ultrasound-indicated cerclage, and 1549 (33.3%) underwent physical examination-indicated cerclage. Most perioperative complications occurred in physical examination-indicated cerclage, especially hemorrhage (2.3%; 95% confidence interval, 0.0-7.6) and preterm premature rupture of membranes (2.5%; 95% confidence interval, 0.91-4.5). The fewest complications occurred in history-indicated cerclage, varying from 0.0% of preterm premature rupture of membranes (95% confidence interval, 0.0-1.7) to 0.9% of hemorrhage (95% confidence interval, 0.0-7.9). In ultrasound-indicated cerclage, the most common complication was hemorrhage (1.4%; 95% confidence interval, 0.0-4.1), followed by lacerations (0.6%; 95% confidence interval, 0.0-3.1) and preterm premature rupture of membranes (0.3%; 95% confidence interval, 0.0-0.8).
Conclusion:
The highest risk of perioperative complications was observed in physical examination-indicated cerclage in comparison with ultrasound- and history-indicated cerclage. However, the occurrence of complications is poorly documented in the published literature, as is the timing of the complications (ie, perioperative or later in pregnancy). There is an urgent need for uniform complication reporting policy in both cohort studies and randomized controlled trials on cerclage.
