{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,22]],"date-time":"2026-09-22T16:14:16Z","timestamp":1790093656977,"version":"4.0.1"},"reference-count":22,"publisher":"Wiley","issue":"10","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2013,10,1]],"date-time":"2013-10-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1380585600000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/termsAndConditions#vor"}],"funder":[{"name":"2011 Inje University research grant"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["onlinelibrary.wiley.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["J of Ultrasound Medicine"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2013,10]]},"abstract":"<jats:sec><jats:title>Objectives<\/jats:title><jats:p>Cervical length assessment is helpful to predict and prevent preterm birth. However, transvaginal sonography is not easy to perform. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship and discrepancies between cervical lengths measured by transabdominal and transvaginal sonography in midpregnancy.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title><jats:p>Transabdominal and transvaginal cervical lengths were measured in 255 pregnant women between 20 and 29 gestational weeks. The discrepancies in cervical lengths between the two methods were analyzed for the following maternal and fetal conditions: (1) vertex versus breech fetal presentation, (2) whether the fetal presenting part overlay the cervical internal os, (3) whether both the internal os and external os were visible or only the internal os was clearly visible, (4) maternal bladder filling status, (5) maternal age, (6) parity, and (7) gestational age.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results<\/jats:title><jats:p>The mean cervical lengths were not significantly different (mean \u00b1 SD, 3.88 \u00b1 0.73 cm on transabdominal sonography and 3.93 \u00b1 0.72 cm on transvaginal sonography; <jats:italic>P<\/jats:italic> = .129; Pearson <jats:italic>r<\/jats:italic> = 0.75). The 5th\u2010percentile transabdominal cervical length was 26.0 mm, and the transvaginal length was 27.8 mm. There were significant discrepancies between the two methods in the cases in which a fetal presenting part overlay the internal os, in the cases in which the external os was not clearly visible, and in primiparous women. Transabdominal cervical measurements were consistently shorter than transvaginal measurements in the cases with discrepancies.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusions<\/jats:title><jats:p>Transabdominal cervical length measurements are correlated with transvaginal measurements overall, and the transabdominal length is consistently shorter than the transvaginal length in cases with discrepancies. Transabdominal sonography could be used as a cervical length screening tool.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.7863\/ultra.32.10.1721","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2013,9,24]],"date-time":"2013-09-24T19:44:35Z","timestamp":1380051875000},"page":"1721-1728","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":21,"title":["Comparison of Cervical Lengths Using Transabdominal and Transvaginal Sonography in Midpregnancy"],"prefix":"10.1002","volume":"32","author":[{"given":"Hyun-Jin","family":"Roh","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Yong Il","family":"Ji","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Chul Hoi","family":"Jung","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Gyun Ho","family":"Jeon","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Sungwook","family":"Chun","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Hyun Jin","family":"Cho","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"311","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2013,10]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_2_6_2_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.siny.2011.08.001"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_3_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1600-0412.2011.01178.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_4_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2011.11.017"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_5_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.9017"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_6_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ogc.2011.02.020"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_7_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0029-7844(02)02212-3"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_8_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/01.AOG.0000275287.08520.4a"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_9_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.202"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_10_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1067\/mob.2000.106851"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_11_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1046\/j.1469-0705.1998.12050312.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_12_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.8911"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_13_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.9073"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_14_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1046\/j.1469-0705.2002.00645.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_15_1","first-page":"CD007235","article-title":"Cervical assessment by ultrasound for preventing preterm delivery","volume":"3","author":"Berghella V","year":"2009","journal-title":"Cochrane Database Syst Rev"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_16_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3109\/14767058.2011.592874"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_17_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/00006250-200012000-00030"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_18_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1046\/j.1469-0705.2000.00094.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_19_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3109\/14767058.2012.657278"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_20_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/jcu.1870190204"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_21_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.7863\/jum.2008.27.9.1305"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_22_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1479-828X.2010.01225.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_6_23_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.2214\/ajr.157.1.2048542"}],"container-title":["Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/api.wiley.com\/onlinelibrary\/tdm\/v1\/articles\/10.7863%2Fultra.32.10.1721","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/api.wiley.com\/onlinelibrary\/tdm\/v1\/articles\/10.7863%2Fultra.32.10.1721","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.7863\/ultra.32.10.1721","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2023,10,30]],"date-time":"2023-10-30T07:43:04Z","timestamp":1698651784000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/10.7863\/ultra.32.10.1721"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2013,10]]},"references-count":22,"journal-issue":{"issue":"10","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2013,10]]}},"alternative-id":["10.7863\/ultra.32.10.1721"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.7863\/ultra.32.10.1721","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["0278-4297","1550-9613"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0278-4297","type":"print"},{"value":"1550-9613","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2013,10]]},"assertion":[{"value":"2012-12-03","order":0,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}},{"value":"2013-02-26","order":1,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}},{"value":"2013-10-01","order":2,"name":"published","label":"Published","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}}]}}