Pregnancy outcome after cervical conisation: a retrospective cohort study in the Leuven University Hospital

Please cite this paper as: van de Vijver A, Poppe W, Verguts J, Arbyn M. Pregnancy outcome after cervical conisation: a retrospective cohort study in the Leuven University Hospital. BJOG 2010;117:268–273. Objective  To assess pregnancy outcome after conisation. Design  Retrospective cohort study. Se...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology 2010-02, Vol.117 (3), p.268-273
Hauptverfasser: van de Vijver, A, Poppe, W, Verguts, J, Arbyn, M
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Please cite this paper as: van de Vijver A, Poppe W, Verguts J, Arbyn M. Pregnancy outcome after cervical conisation: a retrospective cohort study in the Leuven University Hospital. BJOG 2010;117:268–273. Objective  To assess pregnancy outcome after conisation. Design  Retrospective cohort study. Setting  Belgium, data from a university hospital. Population  Fifty‐five pregnancies in 34 women after conisation, and 55 pregnancies in 54 women without a history of conisation or cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). Methods  Hospital data were reviewed and questionnaires were collected from 599 women who had a conisation in a 5‐year period, among whom subsequent pregnancies were identified. The control group consisted of matched pregnancies of women without a history of conisation. Main outcome measures  Gestational age at delivery, neonatal biometry, neonatal condition at birth. Results  Numbers of sexual partners (4.6 ± 3.4 SD versus 2.5 ± 2.5 SD) and ex‐smokers were significantly higher in the study group compared with the control group. Gestational age at delivery (266 ± 2 days versus 274 ± 9 days), neonatal head circumference (33.9 ± 2.5 cm, versus 34.6 ± 2.5 cm) and birthweight (3088 ± 754 g versus 3381 ± 430 g) were significantly lower in the study group compared with the control group. Numbers of preterm [
ISSN:1470-0328
1471-0528
DOI:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2009.02437.x