Cervical gland area: a new sonographic marker in predicting preterm delivery
Preterm delivery is one of the important causes of morbidity and mortality in newborns. Nowadays, a new sonographic marker is suggested for prediction of preterm delivery which is termed “Cervical Gland Area” (CGA). Absence of normal mucosal glands of the cervix can be utilized as a predictor in preterm delivery. This study was performed to evaluate the role of absence of CGA for the prediction of preterm delivery <37 weeks.
Trans-vaginal ultrasonography was performed on 600 pregnant women at 16–19 weeks of gestational age. Cervical gland area and cervical length were evaluated. Women with cervical length <25 mm were conducted to cerclage and excluded from the study. Age, number of pregnancies and history of previous preterm deliveries were recorded in questionnaires. The date of delivery was recorded. Statistical analysis was performed by version 18 SPSS and P value <0.05 was significant.
Spontaneous preterm delivery was seen in 6.7% of all women. There was no significant difference in age, cervical length, the number of pregnancies and history of previous preterm deliveries between term pregnancies and preterm cases. CGA was detected in 77.1% of term pregnancies comparing with 55% in preterm group; which was significantly different (P value = 0.002).
Non detection of CGA at second trimester ultrasonography is a predictor of preterm delivery.
KeywordsCervical gland Area Preterm delivery Ultrasound Cervical insufficiency
Conflict of interest
There is no conflict of interest regarding the article.
- 1.Canry C, Gibbs RS (2008) Preterm labor and postterm delivery. In: Gibbs RS (ed) Danforths obstetrics and gynecology. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia, pp 165–186Google Scholar
- 3.Iams JD, Goldenberg RL, Meis PJ, Mercer BM, Moawal A, Das A, Thom E, McNellis D, Copper RL, Johnson F, Roberts JM (1996) The length of the cervix and the risk of spontaneous premature delivery, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal Fetal Medicine Unit Network. N Eng J Med 334:567–572CrossRefGoogle Scholar