4.6 Article

Perioperative characteristics associated with preterm birth in twin-twin transfusion syndrome treated by laser surgery

期刊

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2013.05.025

关键词

laser surgery; prematurity; preterm birth; twin-twin transfusion syndrome; TTTS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE: To identify perioperative risk factors for preterm delivery (PTD) in laser-treated patients with twin-twin transfusion syndrome (TTTS). STUDY DESIGN: Twin-twin transfusion syndrome patients who underwent laser surgery were followed prospectively. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify gestational and surgical characteristics associated with preterm delivery. RESULTS: Of 318 eligible patients, the mean (SD) gestational age of delivery was 32.8 (4.2) weeks. The number of days from laser surgery to delivery had a bimodal distribution; group I delivered within 21 days and group II delivered after 21 days of surgery. Eighteen patients (5.7%) were in group I and demonstrated the following risk factors for delivery within 21 days: incomplete laser surgery suspected (odds ratio [OR], 11.14; P = .0106), preoperative subchorionic hematoma (OR, 7.92, P = .0361), preoperative cervical length <2.0 cm (OR, 4.71; P = .0117), and recipient's maximum vertical pocket >= 14 cm (OR, 3.23; P = .0335). In group II, 92 of 300 patients (30.7%) delivered <32 weeks, and 25 (8.3%) delivered <28 weeks; multivariate logistic regression analyses identified 5 risk factors for delivery <32 weeks: incomplete laser surgery suspected (OR, 10.0; P = .0506); incidental septostomy (OR, 4.4; P = .0009); triplet gestation (OR, 2.6; P = .0689); postoperative membrane detachment (OR, 2.4; P = .0393); and nonposterior placental location (OR, 1.8; P = .0282). CONCLUSION: Timing of delivery after laser for twin-twin transfusion syndrome has a bimodal distribution with distinct gestational and surgical risk factors. This information may be useful in counseling patients and in directing future avenues of research.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据