Cervical Cerclage Performed at 24–32+0 Weeks in Twin Pregnancies: A Multicenter Descriptive Cohort Study
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design and Participants
2.2. Data Collection and Definitions
2.3. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Study Population
3.2. Baseline and Clinical Characteristics
3.3. Indications for Cerclage in the Late Group
3.4. Pregnancy Outcomes
3.5. Neonatal Outcomes
3.6. Subgroup Analyses by Indication for Cerclage
4. Discussion
4.1. Principal Findings
4.2. Current Guidelines and the Shift in Evidence
4.3. Cerclage at or After 24 Weeks
4.4. Observed Neonatal Course
4.5. Methodological Considerations
4.6. Strengths and Limitations
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
| ACOG | American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists |
| BMI | body mass index |
| BPD | bronchopulmonary dysplasia |
| CI | confidence interval |
| CRP | C-reactive protein |
| HIE | hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy |
| IQR | interquartile range |
| IVF | in vitro fertilization |
| IVH | intraventricular hemorrhage |
| NEC | necrotizing enterocolitis |
| NICU | neonatal intensive care unit |
| OR | odds ratio |
| PPROM | preterm premature rupture of membranes |
| RCOG | Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists |
| RDS | respiratory distress syndrome |
| RR | relative risk |
| SD | standard deviation |
| SMFM | Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine |
| WBC | white blood cell |
References
- Chauhan, S.P.; Scardo, J.A.; Hayes, E.; Abuhamad, A.Z.; Berghella, V. Twins: Prevalence, problems, and preterm births. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2010, 203, 305–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Kindinger, L.M.; Poon, L.C.; Cacciatore, S.; MacIntyre, D.; Fox, N.; Schuit, E.; Mol, B.; Liem, S.; Lim, A.; Hermans, F.; et al. The effect of gestational age and cervical length measurements in the prediction of spontaneous preterm birth in twin pregnancies: An individual patient level meta-analysis. BJOG 2016, 123, 877–884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Romero, R.; Dey, S.K.; Fisher, S.J. Preterm labor: One syndrome, many causes. Science 2014, 345, 760–765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Berghella, V.; Odibo, A.O.; To, M.S.; Rust, O.A.; Althuisius, S.M. Cerclage for short cervix on ultrasonography: Meta-analysis of trials using individual patient-level data. Obstet. Gynecol. 2005, 106, 181–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Saccone, G.; Rust, O.; Althuisius, S.; Roman, A.; Berghella, V. Cerclage for short cervix in twin pregnancies: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials using individual patient-level data. Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 2015, 94, 352–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Practice Bulletin No. 142: Cerclage for the management of cervical insufficiency. Obstet. Gynecol. 2014, 123, 372–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM); Biggio, J.; SMFM Publications Committee. Consult Series #70: Management of short cervix in individuals without a history of spontaneous preterm birth. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2024, 231, B2–B13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Roman, A.; Zork, N.; Schoen, M.C.N.; Saccone, M.G.; Colihan, M.S.; Zelig, M.C.; Gimovsky, M.A.C.; Seligman, M.N.S.; Zullo, M.F.; Berghella, M.V. Physical examination-indicated cerclage in twin pregnancy: A randomized controlled trial. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2020, 223, 902.e1–902.e11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- D’Antonio, F.; Eltaweel, N.; Prasad, S.; Flacco, M.E.; Manzoli, L.; Khalil, A. Cervical cerclage for prevention of preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcome in twin pregnancies with short cervical length or cervical dilatation: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Med. 2023, 20, e1004266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Shennan, A.H.; Story, L.; Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Cervical cerclage: Green-top Guideline No. 75. BJOG 2022, 129, 1178–1210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Shennan, A.; Story, L.; Jacobsson, B.; Grobman, W.A.; FIGO Working Group for Preterm Birth. FIGO good practice recommendations on cervical cerclage for prevention of preterm birth. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 2021, 155, 19–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Mudrik, A.; Levy, R.; Petrecca, A.; Gulersen, M.; Chauhan, S.P.; Erez, O.; Rottenstreich, M. Guidelines on cerclage placement: A comparative systematic review. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. MFM 2025, 7, 101727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Yi, X.; Zhang, D.; Yang, J.; Gao, H.; Cai, H.; Cong, J.; Lin, C. Analysis of perinatal outcomes for emergency cervical cerclage in singleton pregnancies at 24–28 weeks of gestation. Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 2024, 310, 229–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Zhu, Q.; Qiu, L.; Lv, M.; Zhao, Y.; Wei, J.; Yang, M.; Zhou, H.; Zhao, B.; Luo, Q. The efficacy of emergency cervical cerclage in singleton pregnancies at 26–27+6 weeks of gestation: A multicenter retrospective cohort study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2025, 25, 945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Reyna Dueñas, P.; Linder Efter, C.; Olguín-Ortega, A. Late cervical cerclage at 30 weeks of gestation: A case report. Cureus 2025, 17, e94755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Ohuma, E.O.; Moller, A.B.; Bradley, E.; Chakwera, S.; Hussain-Alkhateeb, L.; Lewin, A.; Okwaraji, Y.B.; Mahanani, W.R.; Johansson, E.W.; Lavin, T.; et al. National, regional, and global estimates of preterm birth in 2020, with trends from 2010: A systematic analysis. Lancet 2023, 402, 1261–1271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Hong, S.; Chung, H.S.; Choi, S.; Jo, Y.S. Prediction of outcomes for rescue cerclage in cervical insufficiency: A multicenter retrospective study. Int. J. Med. Sci. 2024, 21, 896–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Lee, J.H.; Youn, Y.; Chang, Y.S. Short- and long-term outcomes of very low birth weight infants in Korea: Korean Neonatal Network update in 2019. Clin. Exp. Pediatr. 2020, 63, 284–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Papile, L.A.; Burstein, J.; Burstein, R.; Koffler, H. Incidence and evolution of subependymal and intraventricular hemorrhage: A study of infants with birth weights less than 1500 gm. J. Pediatr. 1978, 92, 529–534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Jobe, A.H.; Bancalari, E. Bronchopulmonary dysplasia. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2001, 163, 1723–1729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Walsh, M.C.; Kliegman, R.M. Necrotizing enterocolitis: Treatment based on staging criteria. Pediatr. Clin. N. Am. 1986, 33, 179–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Sarnat, H.B.; Sarnat, M.S. Neonatal encephalopathy following fetal distress. A clinical and electroencephalographic study. Arch. Neurol. 1976, 33, 696–705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Buca, D.; Di Mascio, D.; Khalil, A.; Acharya, G.; Van Mieghem, T.; Hack, K.; Murata, M.; Anselem, O.; D’Amico, A.; Muzii, L.; et al. Neonatal morbidity of monoamniotic twin pregnancies: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Am. J. Perinatol. 2022, 39, 243–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Li, C.; Shen, J.; Hua, K. Cerclage for women with twin pregnancies: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2019, 220, 543–557.e1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- van Gils, L.; Dutilh, R.; Denswil, N.; Roman, A.; de Boer, M.A.; Pajkrt, E.; Oudijk, M.A. The effectiveness of ultrasound-indicated cerclage for the reduction of extreme preterm birth in twin pregnancies with a short cervix: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. MFM 2025, 7, 101555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Gulersen, M.; Lenchner, E.; Nicolaides, K.H.; Otsuki, K.; Rust, O.A.; Althuisius, S.; Bornstein, E.; Berghella, V. Cervical cerclage for short cervix at 24 to 26 weeks of gestation: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials using individual patient-level data. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. MFM 2023, 5, 100930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Gulersen, M.; Lenchner, E.; Kommareddy, K.; Pereira, L.; Hummel, P.; Althuisius, S.; Bornstein, E.; Berghella, V. Physical examination-indicated cerclage ≥24 weeks of gestation: Systematic review and meta-analysis using individual patient-level data. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. MFM 2024, 6, 101460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]



| Characteristic | Late (24–32+0 Weeks) (N = 18) | Early (<24 Weeks) (N = 25) |
|---|---|---|
| Maternal age, years | 32.1 ± 5.3 [29.5–34.7] | 35.4 ± 3.2 [34.1–36.7] |
| Nulliparity, n (%) | 16 (88.9) [67.2–96.9] | 16 (64.0) [44.5–79.8] |
| Pre-pregnancy BMI, kg/m2 | 20.4 [19.1–22.7] | 22.2 [20.2–25.9] |
| IVF conception, n (%) | 8 (44.4) [24.6–66.3] | 12 (48.0) [30.0–66.5] |
| History of preterm birth, n (%) | 0 (0.0) [0.0–17.6] | 6 (24.0) [11.5–43.4] |
| Chorionicity, n (%) | ||
| Monochorionic | 3 (16.7) [5.8–39.2] | 4 (16.0) [6.4–34.7] |
| Dichorionic | 15 (83.3) [60.8–94.2] | 21 (84.0) [65.3–93.6] |
| GA at cerclage, weeks | 26.3 [25.3–27.7] | 21.0 [16.9–21.9] |
| Indication, n (%) | ||
| History-indicated | 0 (0.0) [0.0–17.6] | 5 (20.0) [8.9–39.1] |
| Ultrasound-indicated | 14 (77.8) [54.8–91.0] | 16 (64.0) [44.5–79.8] |
| Physical examination-indicated | 4 (22.2) [9.0–45.2] | 4 (16.0) [6.4–34.7] |
| Cervical length at cerclage, cm | 0.71 [0.23–1.20] | 1.20 [0.55–1.78] |
| Cervical dilatation or bulging, n (%) | 4 (22.2) [9.0–45.2] | 4 (16.0) [6.4–34.7] |
| Irregular uterine contractions, n (%) | 7 (38.9) [20.3–61.4] | 5 (20.0) [8.9–39.1] |
| Vaginal bleeding, n (%) | 0 (0.0) [0.0–17.6] | 1 (4.0) [0.7–19.5] |
| CRP at cerclage, mg/dL | 0.26 [0.11–0.34] | 0.20 [0.14–0.49] |
| WBC at cerclage, /µL | 9159 ± 1969 [8180–10,138] | 9493 ± 1807 [8747–10,239] |
| Vaginal progesterone use, n (%) | 7 (38.9) [20.3–61.4] | 10 (40.0) [23.4–59.3] |
| Antibiotic use, n (%) | 17 (94.4) [74.2–99.0] | 23 (92.0) [75.0–97.8] |
| Outcome | Late (24–32+0 Weeks) (N = 18) | Early (<24 Weeks) (N = 25) |
|---|---|---|
| GA at delivery, weeks | 34.1 [31.7–35.4] | 34.1 [29.3–36.4] |
| Cerclage-to-delivery interval, days | 45.8 ± 22.3 [34.7–56.9] | 91.2 ± 44.2 [73.0–109.4] |
| Delivery within 7 days, n (%) | 2 (11.1) [3.1–32.8] | 1 (4.0) [0.7–19.5] |
| Delivery within 14 days, n (%) | 2 (11.1) [3.1–32.8] | 1 (4.0) [0.7–19.5] |
| Delivery within 28 days, n (%) | 5 (27.8) [12.5–50.9] | 2 (8.0) [2.2–25.0] |
| PPROM within 48 h, n (%) | 1 (5.6) [1.0–25.8] | 0 (0.0) [0.0–13.3] |
| Clinical chorioamnionitis, n (%) | 0 (0.0) [0.0–17.6] | 1 (4.0) [0.7–19.5] |
| Preterm birth < 37 weeks, n (%) | 18 (100.0) [82.4–100.0] | 20 (80.0) [60.9–91.1] |
| Preterm birth < 34 weeks, n (%) | 7 (38.9) [20.3–61.4] | 12 (48.0) [30.0–66.5] |
| Preterm birth < 32 weeks, n (%) | 5 (27.8) [12.5–50.9] | 8 (32.0) [17.2–51.6] |
| Preterm birth < 28 weeks, n (%) | 1 (5.6) [1.0–25.8] | 6 (24.0) [11.5–43.4] |
| Neonatal Outcome | Late (24–32+0 Weeks) (N = 36) | Early (<24 Weeks) (N = 46) |
|---|---|---|
| Birth weight, kg a | 2.10 [1.56–2.35] | 2.09 [1.81–2.50] |
| Neonatal death, n (%) b | 0 (0.0) [0.0–17.6] | 4 (8.7) [3.4–20.3] |
| NICU admission, n (%) | 30 (83.3) [62.3–93.8] | 30 (65.2) [46.4–80.2] |
| Respiratory distress syndrome, n (%) | 14 (38.9) [20.7–60.8] | 14 (30.4) [17.3–47.8] |
| Intraventricular hemorrhage, n (%) | 11 (30.6) [15.2–52.0] | 19 (41.3) [24.5–60.4] |
| Bronchopulmonary dysplasia, n (%) | 5 (13.9) [4.4–36.2] | 10 (21.7) [10.6–39.5] |
| Necrotizing enterocolitis, n (%) | 1 (2.8) [0.4–16.9] | 1 (2.2) [0.3–13.6] |
| Hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy, n (%) | 3 (8.3) [2.9–21.9] | 3 (6.5) [2.2–17.7] |
| Neonatal sepsis, n (%) | 4 (11.1) [4.5–24.8] | 8 (17.4) [8.7–31.8] |
| Adverse neonatal morbidity, n (%) | 20 (55.6) [34.2–75.0] | 26 (56.5) [39.1–72.5] |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2026 by the authors. Published by MDPI on behalf of the Lithuanian University of Health Sciences. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.
Share and Cite
Gen, Y.; Kim, O.; Shin, I.; Jo, Y.S.; Hong, J.; Kang, Y.; Yoo, K.; Park, I.Y.; Ko, H.S.; Hong, S. Cervical Cerclage Performed at 24–32+0 Weeks in Twin Pregnancies: A Multicenter Descriptive Cohort Study. Medicina 2026, 62, 1704. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina62091704
Gen Y, Kim O, Shin I, Jo YS, Hong J, Kang Y, Yoo K, Park IY, Ko HS, Hong S. Cervical Cerclage Performed at 24–32+0 Weeks in Twin Pregnancies: A Multicenter Descriptive Cohort Study. Medicina. 2026; 62(9):1704. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina62091704
Chicago/Turabian StyleGen, Yuki, Oyoung Kim, Inhye Shin, Yun Sung Jo, Jiyun Hong, Yiyoon Kang, Kyung Yoo, In Yang Park, Hyun Sun Ko, and Subeen Hong. 2026. "Cervical Cerclage Performed at 24–32+0 Weeks in Twin Pregnancies: A Multicenter Descriptive Cohort Study" Medicina 62, no. 9: 1704. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina62091704
APA StyleGen, Y., Kim, O., Shin, I., Jo, Y. S., Hong, J., Kang, Y., Yoo, K., Park, I. Y., Ko, H. S., & Hong, S. (2026). Cervical Cerclage Performed at 24–32+0 Weeks in Twin Pregnancies: A Multicenter Descriptive Cohort Study. Medicina, 62(9), 1704. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina62091704

