Volume 10, Issue 1 (2025)
SJMR 2025, 10(1): 47-51 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Saremi A, Giti S, Nateghi M R. A Modified Transabdominal Cerclage Technique with the Option of Transvaginal Suture Removal: The Sarem Novel Technique. SJMR 2025; 10 (1) : 8
URL: http://saremjrm.com/article-1-363-en.html
URL: http://saremjrm.com/article-1-363-en.html
1- Sarem Gynecology, Obstetrics and Infertility Research Center, Sarem Women’s Hospital, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. & Sarem Cell Research Center (SCRC), Sarem Women’s Hospital, Tehran, Iran.
2- Sarem Gynecology, Obstetrics and Infertility Research Center, Sarem Women’s Hospital, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
2- Sarem Gynecology, Obstetrics and Infertility Research Center, Sarem Women’s Hospital, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract: (509 Views)
Introduction: Cervical insufficiency is a significant cause of recurrent second-trimester pregnancy loss and preterm birth. In cases where vaginal cerclage (e.g., McDonald or Shirodkar techniques) fails or is not feasible, such as after significant cervical trauma or conization, abdominal cerclage emerges as an alternative. However, the need for repeat laparotomy to remove the suture remains a major limitation. The aim of this article was to introduce and describe a modified transabdominal cerclage technique that allows for transvaginal suture removal, aiming to reduce secondary surgical interventions and improve maternal outcomes as a Sarem Novel Technique in Sarem Women Hospital at Tehran.
Method: The procedure is performed via laparotomy in the late first or early second trimester, after initial fetal assessment. Following the dissection of the bladder peritoneum and opening of the posterior cul-de-sac, a Mersilene tape is placed at the level of the internal os, passing once through the right and once through the left lateral cervix. The suture is then tied posteriorly and directed into the rectovaginal space via the opened peritoneum, enabling potential removal through a minor posterior vaginal incision, if needed.
Results: Our experience in a specialized center suggests that this technique is relatively easy to perform, reduces the need for repeat laparotomy, and enables safe suture removal when indicated. The risk of uterine artery injury is minimized, and uterine contractions are managed pharmacologically during and after the procedure.
Conclusion: This modified abdominal cerclage technique with the option of transvaginal removal offers a safe, effective, and less invasive alternative for selected cases of cervical insufficiency, potentially reducing surgical burden and improving patient outcomes.
Method: The procedure is performed via laparotomy in the late first or early second trimester, after initial fetal assessment. Following the dissection of the bladder peritoneum and opening of the posterior cul-de-sac, a Mersilene tape is placed at the level of the internal os, passing once through the right and once through the left lateral cervix. The suture is then tied posteriorly and directed into the rectovaginal space via the opened peritoneum, enabling potential removal through a minor posterior vaginal incision, if needed.
Results: Our experience in a specialized center suggests that this technique is relatively easy to perform, reduces the need for repeat laparotomy, and enables safe suture removal when indicated. The risk of uterine artery injury is minimized, and uterine contractions are managed pharmacologically during and after the procedure.
Conclusion: This modified abdominal cerclage technique with the option of transvaginal removal offers a safe, effective, and less invasive alternative for selected cases of cervical insufficiency, potentially reducing surgical burden and improving patient outcomes.
Article number: 8
Article Type: Novel Techniques |
Subject:
Women Diseases
Received: 2025/05/14 | Accepted: 2025/06/15 | Published: 2025/08/7
Received: 2025/05/14 | Accepted: 2025/06/15 | Published: 2025/08/7
References
1. Organization WH. Born too soon: decade of action on preterm birth: World Health Organization; 2023.
2. Platt M. Outcomes in preterm infants. Public health. 2014;128(5):399-403. [DOI:10.1016/j.puhe.2014.03.010]
3. Mangham LJ, Petrou S, Doyle LW, Draper ES, Marlow N. The cost of preterm birth throughout childhood in England and Wales. Pediatrics. 2009;123(2):e312-e27. [DOI:10.1542/peds.2008-1827]
4. Shennan A, Story L, Jacobsson B, Grobman WA, Birth FWGfP, Simpson JL, et al. FIGO good practice recommendations on cervical cerclage for prevention of preterm birth. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics. 2021;155(1):19-22. [DOI:10.1002/ijgo.13835]
5. Simcox R, Shennan A. Cervical cerclage: a review. International Journal of Surgery. 2007;5(3):205-9. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijsu.2006.02.006]
6. van der Krogt L, Malligiannis Ntalianis K, Resta C, Suff N, Shennan A, Story L. The role of cervical cerclage in preventing preterm birth. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 2025;311:114060. [DOI:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2025.114060]
7. McDONALD IA. Suture of the cervix for inevitable miscarriage. Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey. 1957;12(5):673-4. [DOI:10.1097/00006254-195710000-00018]
8. Shirodkar V. A new method of operative treatment for habitual abortions in the second trimester of pregnancy. Antiseptic. 1955;52:299-300.
9. Shennan A, Story L, Royal College of Obstetricians G. Cervical cerclage: green‐top guideline no. 75. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 2022;129(7):1178-210. [DOI:10.1111/1471-0528.17003]
10. Shennan A, Chandiramani M, Bennett P, David AL, Girling J, Ridout A, et al. MAVRIC: a multicenter randomized controlled trial of transabdominal vs transvaginal cervical cerclage. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2020;222(3):261. e1-. e9. [DOI:10.1016/j.ajog.2019.09.040]
11. Carlisle N, Carter J. Preterm Birth: A Handbook for Midwives: Routledge; 2024. [DOI:10.4324/9781003380504]
12. Goldenberg RL, Culhane JF, Iams JD, Romero R. Epidemiology and causes of preterm birth. The lancet. 2008;371(9606):75-84. [DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(08)60074-4]
13. Khander A, Stern E, Gerber RS, Fox NS. The association between obstetrical history and preterm birth in women with uterine anomalies. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine. 2018;31(19):2550-4. [DOI:10.1080/14767058.2017.1347625]
14. Suff N, Xu VX, Glazewska-Hallin A, Carter J, Brennecke S, Shennan A. Previous term emergency caesarean section is a risk factor for recurrent spontaneous preterm birth; a retrospective cohort study. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 2022;271:108-11. [DOI:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2022.02.008]
15. Kalaitzopoulos DR, Maris I, Chatzistergiou K, Schoretsanitis G, Grimbizis G, Daniilidis A. Pre-conceptional laparoscopic cerclage for prevention of preterm birth: a systematic review. Facts, Views & Vision in ObGyn. 2025;17(2):149. [DOI:10.52054/FVVO.2024.13388]
16. Bobotis S, Arsenaki E, Hamilton K, Vougiouklaki E-S, Paraskevaidi M, Chilcott I, et al. Transabdominal versus transvaginal cervical cerclage in the prevention of preterm birth: A systematic review and meta-analysis. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2025. [DOI:10.1016/j.ajog.2025.07.026]
17. Bobotis S, Arsenaki E, Hamilton K, Vougiouklaki E-S, Paraskevaidi M, Chilcott I, et al. Transabdominal versus transvaginal cervical cerclage in the prevention of preterm birth: A systematic review and meta-analysis. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology.
18. Story L, Shennan A. Cervical cerclage: An evolving evidence base. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 2024;131(12):1579-86. [DOI:10.1111/1471-0528.17905]
19. Huang G, Deng C, Liao H, Hu Q, Yu H, Wang X. Comparison of transvaginal cervical cerclage versus laparoscopic abdominal cervical cerclage in cervical insufficiency: a retrospective study from a single centre. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth. 2022;22(1):773. [DOI:10.1186/s12884-022-05108-w]
20. Temming L, Mikhail E. Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Consult Series #65: Transabdominal cerclage. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2023;228(6):B2-B10. [DOI:10.1016/j.ajog.2023.02.018]
21. Abdallah W. Updates on laparoscopic cervical cerclage: obstetric outcomes and surgical techniques. Future science OA. 2023;9(8):Fso885. [DOI:10.2144/fsoa-2023-0051]
22. Tolosa JE, Boelig RC, Bell J, Martínez-Baladejo M, Stoltzfus J, Mateus J, et al. Concurrent progestogen and cerclage to reduce preterm birth: a multicenter international retrospective cohort. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology MFM. 2024;6(7):101351. [DOI:10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101351]
23. Shennan A. MAVRIC: a multicentre randomized controlled trial of transabdominal vs transvaginal cervical cerclage. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2020;222(5):516-7. [DOI:10.1016/j.ajog.2020.01.005]
24. van der Krogt L, Ntalianis KM, Resta C, Suff N, Shennan A, Story L. The role of cervical cerclage in preventing preterm birth. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 2025:114060. [DOI:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2025.114060]
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
