4.2 Review

Preterm Prelabor Rupture of Membranes and Fetal Survival after Minimally Invasive Fetal Surgery: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Journal

FETAL DIAGNOSIS AND THERAPY
Volume 31, Issue 1, Pages 1-9

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000331165

Keywords

Acardiac twin; Fetal therapy; Laser coagulation; Obstructive uropathy; Premature rupture of membrane; Twin-twin transfusion syndrome; Lower urinary tract obstruction; Twin-reversed arterial perfusion; Laser ablation; Fetal shunt; Cord occlusion

Funding

  1. European Commission [LSHC-CT-2006-037409, CT2005 019707]
  2. Marie Curie Reintegration Grant [PERG07-GA-2010-268330]
  3. Flemish Regional Government [IWT/070715]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Iatrogenic preterm prelabor rupture of membranes (iPPROM; <37 weeks of gestation) is a major complication of fetal surgery. Little information is available about risk factors and incidence. Methods: We systematically reviewed reported iPPROM rates, gestational age at delivery and fetal survival after representative minimally invasive antenatal procedures. Results: A total of 1,146, 36 and 194 cases with mean iPPROM rates of 27, 31 and 26% were included for placental laser in twin-twin transfusion syndrome, shunting in lower urinary tract obstruction and interventions for twin-reversed arterial perfusion, respectively. In the statistical analysis, the maximum diameter of the instrument predicted iPPROM rate and was significantly related to gestational age at birth as well as fetal survival. Information on duration of the respective procedures was scarce and did not allow for meaningful analysis. Conclusions: iPPROM occurs in about 30% of cases treated by minimally invasive fetal surgery. The maximum diameter of the instrument explains iPPROM rate, gestational age at birth and fetal survival. Great variations in the reporting of iPPROM make data analysis difficult. Copyright (C) 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel

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