4.2 Article

Risk Factors for Co-Twin Fetal Demise following Radiofrequency Ablation in Multifetal Monochorionic Gestations

Journal

FETAL DIAGNOSIS AND THERAPY
Volume 47, Issue 11, Pages 817-823

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000509401

Keywords

Monochorionic twins; Radiofrequency ablation; Selective reduction; Umbilical cord occlusion

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Umbilical cord occlusion via radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is utilized to maximize outcomes of the co-twin in complicated multifetal monochorionic (MC) gestations. However, post-procedure co-twin fetal demise is of concern. Objective: The aim of this study was to determine risk factors for co-twin fetal demise following RFA. Methods: This is a retrospective study of MC multiples that underwent RFA. Indications for RFA included twin reversed arterial perfusion (TRAP) sequence, selective fetal growth restriction (sFGR) type II, discordant lethal anomalies, and twin-twin transfusion syndrome (TTTS) with proximate placental cord insertion sites. The primary outcome was co-twin fetal demise. Bivariate analyses and multiple logistic regression modeling of identified risk factors were conducted. Results: Of 36 patients studied, surgical indications were: TRAP (n = 15, 41.7%), sFGR (n = 10, 27.8%), discordant anomalies (n = 9, 25.0%), and TTTS (n = 2, 5.6%). Nine patients (25.0%) experienced a co-twin fetal demise. In multiple logistic regression analysis, fetal growth restriction (FGR) of one co-twin was associated with increased risk of co-twin fetal demise (OR = 10.85, 95% CI 1.03-114.48, p = 0.0474) and a preoperative diagnosis of TRAP was protective against fetal demise (OR = 0.06, 95% CI 0.00-0.84, p = 0.0368). Conclusion: Co-twin FGR was associated with an increased risk of post-RFA demise. When compared to other indications, patients with TRAP sequence were less likely to have a co-twin demise.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available