SpringerLink
Log in

The utility of combined utero-cervical ındex in predicting preterm delivery in pregnant women with preterm uterine contractions

  • Maternal-Fetal Medicine
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the utility of a novel ultrasound index “combined utero-cervical index (CUCI)” in the prediction of preterm delivery.

Methods

The present prospective cohort study was conducted in Ankara Bilkent City Hospital Perinatology Clinic between January 1, 2023, and March 31, 2023. Pregnant women with uterine contractions between 24 and 36th gestational weeks but did not have dilatation or effacement were included. CUCI was calculated as: (utero-cervical angle)/(anterior cervical lip thickness + fundal thickness + lower uterine segment thickness + cervical length). In the presence of cervical funneling, one point was added to the final result. A ROC analysis was conducted to determine the potential of CUCI in predicting delivery <37 weeks of gestation, <34 weeks of gestation, and <4 weeks after the first admission to the hospital for uterine contractions, respectively.

Results

Optimal cut-off values of CUCI were found to be 1.4 (67.1% sensitivity, 67.2% specificity) for predicting delivery at <37th weeks, 1.7 (72.7% sensitivity, 65.7% specificity) for predicting delivery at <34th weeks, and 1.4 (62.5% sensitivity, 61.7% specificity) for predicting delivery at <4 weeks.

Conclusion

CUCI may be used in the prediction of preterm delivery for pregnant women admitted to hospital with preterm uterine contractions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price includes VAT (Germany)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data used in the present study can be shared on demand if any concern rises due to the reliability of the data but according to the ethical and leagal regulations in Turkey the authors can not share the data via a data repository.

References

  1. Waitzman NJ, Jalali A, Grosse SD (2021) Preterm birth lifetime costs in the United States in 2016: an update. Semin Perinatol 45(3):151390

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Koullali B, Oudijk M, Nijman T, Mol B, Pajkrt E (2016) Risk assessment and management to prevent preterm birth. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med 21(2):80–88

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Suff N, Story L, Shennan A (2019) The prediction of preterm delivery: What is new? Semin Fetal Neonatal Med 24(1):27–32

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Markenson GR, Saade GR, Laurent LC, Heyborne KD, Coonrod DV, Schoen CN et al (2020) Performance of a proteomic preterm delivery predictor in a large independent prospective cohort. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2(3):100140

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ng VWY, Seto MTY, Lewis H, Cheung KW (2023) A prospective, double-blinded cohort study using quantitative fetal fibronectin testing in symptomatic women for the prediction of spontaneous preterm delivery. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 23(1):1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Berghella V, Saccone G (2019) Cervical assessment by ultrasound for preventing preterm delivery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 9(9):CD007235

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Miller DA (2017) Chapter 15—Intrapartum fetal evaluation. In: Gabbe SG, Niebyl JR, Simpson JL, Landon MB, Galan HL, Jauniaux ERM et al (eds) Obstetrics: normal and problem pregnancies, 7th edn. Elsevier, Philadelphia, pp 308–343

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Prediction and Prevention of Spontaneous Preterm Birth (2021) ACOG practice bulletin, number 234. Obstet Gynecol 138(2):e65–e90. https://doi.org/10.1097/aog.0000000000004479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Zahedi-Spung LD, Raghuraman N, Macones GA, Cahill AG, Rosenbloom JI (2022) Neonatal morbidity and mortality by mode of delivery in very preterm neonates. Am J Obstet Gynecol 226(1):114.e1-114.e7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Braun T, Sloboda DM, Tutschek B, Harder T, Challis JR, Dudenhausen JW et al (2015) Fetal and neonatal outcomes after term and preterm delivery following betamethasone administration. Int J Gynecol Obstet 130(1):64–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Cruz-Lemini M, Vázquez JC, Ullmo J, Llurba E (2022) Low-molecular-weight heparin for prevention of preeclampsia and other placenta-mediated complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 226(2):S1126-S1144.e17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2020.11.006

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Coutinho CM, Sotiriadis A, Odibo A, Khalil A, D’Antonio F, Feltovich H et al (2022) ISUOG practice guidelines: role of ultrasound in the prediction of spontaneous preterm birth. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 60(3):435–456. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.26020

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Fruscalzo A, Mazza E, Feltovich H, Schmitz R (2016) Cervical elastography during pregnancy: a critical review of current approaches with a focus on controversies and limitations. J Med Ultrason 43:493–504

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kim H, Hwang HS (2017) Elastographic measurement of the cervix during pregnancy: current status and future challenges. Obstet Gynecol Sci 60(1):1–7

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Sepúlveda-Martínez A, Díaz F, Muñoz H, Valdés E, Parra-Cordero M (2017) Second-trimester anterior cervical angle in a low-risk population as a marker for spontaneous preterm delivery. Fetal Diagn Ther 41(3):220–225

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Dziadosz M, Bennett T-A, Dolin C, Honart AW, Pham A, Lee SS et al (2016) Uterocervical angle: a novel ultrasound screening tool to predict spontaneous preterm birth. Am J Obstet Gynecol 215(3):376.e1-376.e7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ahmed WS, Madny E, Habash Y, Ibrahim Z, Morsy A, Said M (2015) Ultrasonographic wall thickness measurement of the upper and lower uterine segments in the prediction of the progress of preterm labour. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol 42(3):2015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Yapan P, Wanitpongpan P, Sripang N (2022) Association between lower uterine wall thickness measured at 18–22 weeks of gestation and risk of Preterm Birth: a prospective cohort study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 22(1):618

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Gürsoy Erzincan S, Sayin NC, Korkmaz S, Sutcu H, Inan C, Uzun Cilingir I et al (2019) Can myometrial thickness/cervical length ratio predict preterm delivery in singleton pregnancies with threatened preterm labor? A prospective study. Arch Gynecol Obstet 299:1275–1282

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Singh S, Gupta N (2022) Sonographic evaluation of myometrial thickness at different gestations for prediction of labor in preterm premature rupture of membranes. J South Asian Feder Obstet Gynaecol 13(6):415–421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Della Rosa PA, Miglioli C, Caglioni M, Tiberio F, Mosser KH, Vignotto E et al (2021) A hierarchical procedure to select intrauterine and extrauterine factors for methodological validation of preterm birth risk estimation. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 21(1):1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Dehaene I, Steen J, Dukes O, Olarte Parra C, De Coen K, Smets K et al (2023) On optimal timing of antenatal corticosteroids: time to reformulate the question. Arch Gynecol Obstet 308(4):1085–1091

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Rauh M, Werle F, Schmidt B, Litzka C, Solano ME, Köninger A (2023) Prevalence of genital mycoplasma in pregnancies with shortened cervix. Arch Gynecol Obstet. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-023-07252-w

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Sapantzoglou I, Pergialiotis V, Prokopakis I, Douligeris A, Stavros S, Panagopoulos P et al (2023) Antibiotic therapy in patients with amniotic fluid sludge and risk of preterm birth: a meta-analysis. Arch Gynecol Obstet 309(2):347–361

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Dehaene I, Steen J, Vandewiele G, Roelens K, Decruyenaere J (2022) The web-based application “QUiPP v. 2” for the prediction of preterm birth in symptomatic women is not yet ready for worldwide clinical use: ten reflections on development, validation and use. Arch Gynecol Obstet 306(2):571–575

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Cobo T, Kacerovsky M, Jacobsson B (2020) Risk factors for spontaneous preterm delivery. Int J Gynecol Obstet 150(1):17–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Saade GR, Boggess KA, Sullivan SA, Markenson GR, Iams JD, Coonrod DV et al (2016) Development and validation of a spontaneous preterm delivery predictor in asymptomatic women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 214(5):633.e1-633.e24

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding was used for this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Turkish Ministry of Health Ankara City Hospital, University of Health Sciences, 06800, Ankara, Turkey

    Atakan Tanacan, Bedri Sakcak, Ramazan Denizli, Zahid Agaoglu, Nihat Farisogullari, Ozgur Kara & Dilek Sahin

Authors
  1. Atakan Tanacan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bedri Sakcak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ramazan Denizli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zahid Agaoglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Nihat Farisogullari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ozgur Kara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Dilek Sahin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

AT: original draft preparation, writing, data collection, conceptualization, methodology. BS: data collection, writing. RD: data collection, writing. ZA: data collection, writing. NF: data collection, writing. OK: supervision, writing. DS: project development, writing, critical review.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Atakan Tanacan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors state that they have no conflict of interest in this study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tanacan, A., Sakcak, B., Denizli, R. et al. The utility of combined utero-cervical ındex in predicting preterm delivery in pregnant women with preterm uterine contractions. Arch Gynecol Obstet 310, 377–385 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-024-07395-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-024-07395-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation