20 Week U/S, 21 mm cervix, second baby

[Tellera]

Hi folks,

I don't know if anyone can offer insight as to whether I should be really concerned, mildly concerned, or not really concerned... or any thoughts at all.

I just had an u/s, the first, and I thought only, u/s this pregnancy, and they said I had a short cervix, 21 mm. My midwives have me going back to the radiology center next week, mid-week, to remeasure. I am at 19 and a half weeks right now.

They mentioned cerclage if I continue to shorten, but now that I'm home I read that this is actually controversial as to whether or not it will actually stop preterm labor.

The only other risk factor I have for pre-term labor associated with a short cervix (that I know of) is that I had bleeding on and off for a couple weeks in the first trimester.

I read online that at 20mm or less they recommend strict bedrest. As it is I am to just take it easy until the next measurement, and no heavy lifting, per my midwife.

So, I'm on the anxious side. I don't think I had this with my DS, or it would have shown up on the 20 week u/s I had with him, right?

Any birth professionals have any experience with similar situations with their clients?

My midwives said to call them over the weekend if I have any questions, but I'm not sure what I'd even ask - anything? Or is there really nothing to talk about until I find out if I am continuing to shorten?

Thank you...

[JessicaE]

I'm sorry for the worry.

Did they measure your cervix vaginally? That's much more accurate than a measurement obtained abdominally. When they do the re-check, you might ask to have it done vaginally to be sure you're at least getting an accurate number.

That's the only real input I have (based on some friends who've had incompetent cervix), hopefully some midwives can shed more light on this situation for you.

[Tellera]

First it was just the regular ultrasound, then she looked using a different wand right at the opening of my vagina, then she use a third wand that actually went inside my vagina. Is that what you meant by vaginally?

Thanks for your thoughts!

[JessicaE]

Originally Posted by Tellera

First it was just the regular ultrasound, then she looked using a different wand right at the opening of my vagina, then she use a third wand that actually went inside my vagina. Is that what you meant by vaginally?

Thanks for your thoughts!

Yes, that's what I mean (fixed the wording in my original post because I mis-typed). Sounds like they were pretty thorough. I have read differing opinions on how much cervical length really means, but I think that everyone wants to err on the side of caution.

Hopefully someone here will have better answers/opinions for you. Best wishes!

[Tellera]

Thanks! Yes, they certainly were thorough.

[jengacnm]

link:
http://www.guideline.gov/summary/sum...=1&doc_id=8304

quote:
"One investigation showed that all 24 subjects who delivered prematurely had a cervical length of less than 3.0 cm, and none of 15 women who had a cervical length of at least 3.0 cm delivered spontaneously before 36 weeks."

I can't find from context when the cervical measurements were taken in these studies, but I didn't scrutinize the entire report. It's a literature review with recommendations.

HTH!
Jennifer

[Tellera]

Thanks, Jennifer!

Anyone know of studies of those who have less than 3.0 cm not delivering preterm?

[Tellera]

bump...