A randomized controlled trial of cervical scanning vs history to determine cerclage in women at high risk of preterm birth (CIRCLE Trial)

  • Simcox R
  • Seed P
  • Bennett P
 et al. 
  • 34


    Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
  • 0


    Citations of this article.


Objective: We sought to compare history-indicated placement of cervical cerclage based on history- vs ultrasound-indicated placement in women at risk of preterm birth. Study Design: We conducted a randomized controlled trial of history-indicated cervical cerclage suture based on history (clinician preference) vs ultrasound (< 20 mm cervical length) indicated in women at increased risk. Results: The incidence of the primary outcome, preterm delivery between 24+0and 33+6weeks, was similar: 19/125 (15%) in the history-indicated group vs 18/122 (15%) in the ultrasound-indicated group (relative risk [RR], 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-1.76). Those women randomized to the ultrasound-indicated arm were significantly more likely to receive a cerclage (32% vs 19%; RR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.07-2.47) and progesterone (39% vs 25%; RR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.06-2.25). Conclusion: Screening women at high risk with cervical ultrasound to determine cerclage placement results in more intervention but similar outcome compared with history-indicated placement. © 2009 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Get free article suggestions today

Mendeley saves you time finding and organizing research

Sign up here
Already have an account ?Sign in

Find this document

Get full text


  • Rachael Simcox

  • Paul T. Seed

  • Phillip Bennett

  • T. G. Teoh

  • Lucilla Poston

  • Andrew H. Shennan

Cite this document

Choose a citation style from the tabs below

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free