Background: This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of
laparoscopic and transvaginal cervical cerclage treatments in patients with
cervical insufficiency before and during pregnancy. Methods: A total of
70 patients diagnosed with cervical insufficiency and undergoing cervical
cerclage at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University between
January 2020 and December 2022 were included. The patients were divided into
three groups based on different surgical methods: transvaginal loop during
pregnancy (Group 1, n = 30), transabdominal loop before pregnancy (Group 2, n =
20), and transabdominal loop during pregnancy (Group 3, n = 20). The groups were
compared in terms of general clinical data, operation time, intraoperative
bleeding, hospital stay, delivery gestational weeks, preterm delivery rate,
prolonged gestational weeks, and neonatal births. Results: (1) There
were no statistically significant differences in age, pregnancy, delivery, number
of miscarriages, cervical length, and history of midterm pregnancy loss among the
three groups (p 0.05). (2) Prolonged gestational week, delivery
gestational week, term delivery, and neonatal birth weight were higher in Groups
2 and 3 compared to Group 1, with statistically significant differences
(p 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference
(p 0.05) when comparing Group 2 and Group 3. Premature rupture of
membranes and preterm delivery were higher in Group 1 compared to Groups 2 and 3,
with statistically significant differences (p 0.05). There was no
statistically significant difference when comparing Group 2 and Group 3
(p 0.05). (3) The amount of surgical bleeding and surgical time
showed statistically significant differences (p 0.05) among the
three groups. Group 1 had more surgical bleeding than Groups 2 and 3, with
statistically significant differences (p 0.05). When comparing Group
2 and Group 3, Group 3 had more surgical bleeding than Group 2, with a
statistically significant difference (p 0.05). Group 2 had a shorter
surgical time than Group 1 and Group 3, with statistically significant
differences (p 0.05). When comparing Group 1 and Group 3, Group 3
had a longer surgical time than Group 1, with a statistically significant
difference (p 0.05). There was no statistically significant
difference in hospital stay when comparing three groups (p 0.05).
Conclusions: Laparoscopic cervical cerclage is a safe and effective
treatment option, yielding better pregnancy outcomes than transvaginal cervical
cerclage, particularly for patients with previous failed transvaginal cerclage.
Preconception laparoscopic cervical cerclage carries lower surgical risks and
should be considered for clinical application.