Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(8)
Instead, the cervix length had shortened instead of stabilizing.
These findings justify the search for additional diagnostic tests in patients with normal cervix length.
This means, that out of all cases of preterm deliveries (< 35 weeks) in 62.7% the cervix length was above 25 mm.
The Spearman correlation test showed a statistically significant, positive correlation between elastographic assessment of internal os stiffness and cervix length at 18-22 weeks of pregnancy (R = 0,3594; p < 0.001).
Our results show, that even in asymptomatic patients with a normal cervix length at 18-22 weekscanan it is possible to identify a group of patients with high risk of preterm birth.
Furthermore, we plan to separately report on the treatment effect in the following subgroups: 1) PPROM versus intact membranes 2) GA < 30 weeks versus > 30 weeks, 3) fibronectin positive women only, 4) women with a cervix length < 10 mm, 5) multiple pregnancies, and 6) women with a history of preterm birth.
Similar(52)
We divided the studied women into a group with favourable cervix (cervical length < 30 mm) at baseline and a group with an unfavourable cervix (cervical length ≥ 30 mm).
Study Design: A retrospective cohort study identified patients with an ultrasonographic short cervix (cervical length ≤15 mm) between 14 and 24 weeks' gestation.
In a study among women with multiple prior-induced abortions, Visintine et al. (2008) reported preterm birth incidence of 47% in women with a short cervix (cervical length <25 mm) compared with 14% among those without a short cervix.
If the cervix is of sufficient length, the chance of imminent preterm delivery is low, and hospitalization or therapy of women otherwise considered at-risk may be avoided.
For each centimetre increase in the length of cervix at randomisation, the risk of caesarean delivery was higher by 31% if women were managed expectantly and by 14% if they underwent labour induction.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com