Risks of single fetal demise after laser for Twin-Twin Transfusion Syndrome

Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy

Gebb J. · Miller K. · Hwang R. · Soni S. · Paidas Teefey C. · Didier R. · Oliver E.R. · Rychik J. · Moldenhauer J.S. · Khalek N.

Log in to MyKarger to check if you already have access to this content.

Buy FullText & PDF Unlimited re-access via MyKarger Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use
read more

CHF 38.00 *
EUR 35.00 *
USD 39.00 *

Select

KAB

Buy a Karger Article Bundle (KAB) and profit from a discount!

If you would like to redeem your KAB credit, please log in.

Save over 20% compared to the individual article price.

Learn more

Access via DeepDyve Unlimited fulltext viewing Of this article Organize, annotate And mark up articles Printing And downloading restrictions apply

Select

Subscribe Access to all articles of the subscribed year(s) guaranteed for 5 years Unlimited re-access via Subscriber Login or MyKarger Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use read more

Subcription rates

Select

* The final prices may differ from the prices shown due to specifics of VAT rules.

Article / Publication Details Abstract

Introduction: To determine if markers of donor placental insufficiency and recipient cardiac dysfunction increase the risk for single fetal demise (SFD) after laser for Twin-Twin Transfusion Syndrome (TTTS). Methods: Single center retrospective review of patients who had laser for TTTS. Risk factors for donor and recipient demise within one week were compared in pregnancies with SFD and pregnancies with dual survival using Chi square or Fisher’s exact test. Multivariate logistic regression was then performed. Results: Of 398 procedures, 305 (76.6%) had dual survival, 36 (9.0%) had donor demise, 28 (7.0%) had recipient demise and 9 (2.3%) had dual demise. The remaining 20 (5.0%) patients had complicated courses with pregnancy loss or further intervention. In the 64 pregnancies with SFD, 29 (81%) in the donor group and 20 (71%) in the recipient group occurred in the first postoperative week. For the donor demise group, estimated fetal weight (EFW) 25%, and EFW discordance > 30% did not increase the risk for donor demise except in cases that also had umbilical artery absent or reversed end diastolic flow (AREDF). Donor AREDF was the only independent risk factor for early donor demise. For the recipient demise group, recipient abnormal venous Dopplers were associated with increased risk while EFW discordance > 25% was associated with decreased risk of recipient loss. Discussion/Conclusion: In our cohort, donor growth restriction did not increase the risk of early donor demise after laser unless there was also donor AREDF. Donor AREDF was an independent risk factor for donor demise likely due to the severity of placental insufficiency. Abnormal recipient venous Doppler indices increased the risk of early recipient loss while a large intertwin discordance decreased the risk. This may be explained by profound overload in cases with recipient abnormal venous Doppler velocimetry and a lower risk of substantial fluid shifts from a relatively smaller donor territory when there is a large discordance.

S. Karger AG, Basel

Article / Publication Details Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

留言 (0)

沒有登入
gif