{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,10,27]],"date-time":"2025-10-27T15:53:07Z","timestamp":1761580387671},"reference-count":15,"publisher":"Wiley","issue":"4","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2006,3,24]],"date-time":"2006-03-24T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1143158400000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/termsAndConditions#vor"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Ultrasound in Obstet &amp; Gyne"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2006,4]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>Objectives<\/jats:title><jats:p>To determine prospectively if dynamic cervical change (spontaneous real\u2010time cervical shortening) is predictive of preterm delivery at &lt; 37 weeks' gestation in patients with symptoms of preterm labor.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title><jats:p>This was a prospective study of patients at 23\u201334 weeks' gestation who were symptomatic for preterm labor. Patients underwent a 10\u2010min real\u2010time sonographic cervical length assessment with measurements taken at 1\u2010min intervals. The presence or absence of dynamic cervical change, defined as real\u2010time changes in cervical length observable to the naked eye of the sonologist during the examination, was recorded. Gestational age at delivery was obtained from medical records. Preterm delivery was defined as delivery at &lt; 37 weeks' gestation. Dynamic cervical change and initial and minimum cervical lengths were assessed for prediction of preterm delivery.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results<\/jats:title><jats:p>Seventy\u2010six patients were enrolled, and 66 were available for outcome analysis. Thirty\u2010one patients (47%) exhibited dynamic cervical change. Patients with dynamic change had shorter initial cervical lengths (27 mm vs. 36 mm, <jats:italic>P<\/jats:italic> = 0.001), shorter minimum cervical lengths (20 vs. 33 mm, <jats:italic>P<\/jats:italic> &lt; 0.001) and larger changes in cervical length during the examination period (10 vs. 4 mm, <jats:italic>P<\/jats:italic> &lt; 0.001). In the subgroup of patients with an initial cervical length &gt; 30 mm, those with dynamic change delivered earlier than did those without dynamic change (36.8 vs. 38.6 weeks, <jats:italic>P<\/jats:italic> = 0.02), and a higher percentage delivered preterm (27% vs. 11%, odds ratio (OR), 3.0 (0.5\u201317.0)). Multivariate analysis showed that minimum cervical length was a better predictor of preterm delivery than was initial cervical length.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusions<\/jats:title><jats:p>Dynamic cervical change occurs frequently in association with shortened cervical length. In patients with longer initial cervical lengths, dynamic change may increase the risk for preterm delivery. When dynamic change is noted in a patient with preterm labor symptoms, use of the minimum cervical length observed may be better compared with initial cervical length for determining preterm delivery risk. Copyright \u00a9 2006 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.2741","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2006,3,24]],"date-time":"2006-03-24T22:48:54Z","timestamp":1143240534000},"page":"373-376","update-policy":"http:\/\/dx.doi.org\/10.1002\/crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":12,"title":["Dynamic cervical change: is real\u2010time sonographic cervical shortening predictive of preterm delivery in patients with symptoms of preterm labor?"],"prefix":"10.1002","volume":"27","author":[{"given":"S. M.","family":"Jenkins","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"J. T.","family":"Kurtzman","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"K.","family":"Osann","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"311","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2006,3,24]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_2_6_2_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/00006254-199304000-00001"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_3_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJM199602293340904"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_4_2","first-page":"40","article-title":"Cervical sonography in preterm labor","volume":"84","author":"Iams JD","year":"1994","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_5_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0002-9378(90)91084-P"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_6_2","first-page":"829","article-title":"Evaluation of threatened preterm delivery by transvaginal ultrasonographic measurement of cervical length","volume":"82","author":"Murakawa H","year":"1993","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_7_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0029-7844(98)00346-9"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_8_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1046\/j.1469-0705.1997.10030161.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_9_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0002-9378(96)70338-1"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_10_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.7863\/jum.1988.7.9.481"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_11_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1148\/radiology.196.3.7644635"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_12_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.286.11.1340"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_13_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.1049"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_14_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0002-9378(95)91469-2"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_15_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0020-7292(00)00313-1"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_16_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJM199807303390506"}],"container-title":["Ultrasound in Obstetrics &amp; Gynecology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/api.wiley.com\/onlinelibrary\/tdm\/v1\/articles\/10.1002%2Fuog.2741","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1002\/uog.2741","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2023,10,8]],"date-time":"2023-10-08T08:32:44Z","timestamp":1696753964000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/10.1002\/uog.2741"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2006,3,24]]},"references-count":15,"journal-issue":{"issue":"4","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2006,4]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1002\/uog.2741"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/uog.2741","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["0960-7692","1469-0705"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0960-7692","type":"print"},{"value":"1469-0705","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2006,3,24]]},"assertion":[{"value":"2006-01-26","order":1,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}},{"value":"2006-03-24","order":2,"name":"published","label":"Published","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}}]}}