Search

Background: Cervical incompetence and deformities contribute significantly to mid-trimester pregnancy losses and preterm births. Abdominal cerclages prevent these complications, particularly in patients with a history of failed vaginal cerclage or severe cervical deformities. However, pregnancy complications such as chorioamnionitis and fetal demise may necessitate cerclage removal. The removal methods vary, with the least invasive being the colpotomy approach, associated with lower morbidity rates than the transabdominal approach or laparoscopy. Case Report: We detail a case involving a 31-year-old woman with a twin pregnancy at 18 weeks gestation, complicated by COVID-19 and chorioamnionitis. This clinical scenario necessitated the removal of an abdominal cerclage. Given the patient's risk profile, a posterior colpotomy approach was deemed most suitable. Conclusions: The posterior colpotomy approach provided an effective and less risky method for abdominal cerclage removal in a high-risk patient. It successfully mitigated the potential complications of general anesthesia and operative risks associated with laparoscopy/laparotomy, offering optimal operative conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND Cervical incompetence and deformities contribute significantly to mid-trimester pregnancy losses and preterm births. Abdominal cerclages prevent these complications, particularly in patients with a history of failed vaginal cerclage or severe cervical deformities. However, pregnancy complications such as chorioamnionitis and fetal demise may necessitate cerclage removal. The removal methods vary, with the least invasive being the colpotomy approach, associated with lower morbidity rates than the transabdominal approach or laparoscopy. CASE REPORT We detail a case involving a 31-year-old woman with a twin pregnancy at 18 weeks gestation, complicated by COVID-19 and chorioamnionitis. This clinical scenario necessitated the removal of an abdominal cerclage. Given the patient's risk profile, a posterior colpotomy approach was deemed most suitable. CONCLUSIONS The posterior colpotomy approach provided an effective and less risky method for abdominal cerclage removal in a high-risk patient. It successfully mitigated the potential complications of general anesthesia and operative risks associated with laparoscopy/laparotomy, offering optimal operative conditions.