Journal article icon

Journal article

Diagnosis and management of selective fetal growth restriction in monochorionic twin pregnancies: A cross‐sectional international survey

Abstract:
Objective: To identify current practices in the management of selective fetal growth restriction (sFGR) in monochorionic diamniotic (MCDA) twin pregnancies. Design: Cross‐sectional survey. Setting: International. Population: Clinicians involved in the management of MCDA twin pregnancies with sFGR. Methods: A structured, self‐administered survey. Main Outcome Measures: Clinical practices and attitudes to diagnostic criteria and management strategies. Results: Overall, 62.8% (113/180) of clinicians completed the survey; of which, 66.4% (75/113) of the respondents reported that they would use an estimated fetal weight (EFW) of <10th centile for the smaller twin and an inter‐twin EFW discordance of >25% for the diagnosis of sFGR. For early‐onset type I sFGR, 79.8% (75/94) of respondents expressed that expectant management would be their routine practice. On the other hand, for early‐onset type II and type III sFGR, 19.3% (17/88) and 35.7% (30/84) of respondents would manage these pregnancies expectantly, whereas 71.6% (63/88) and 57.1% (48/84) would refer these pregnancies to a fetal intervention centre or would offer fetal intervention for type II and type III cases, respectively. Moreover, 39.0% (16/41) of the respondents would consider fetoscopic laser surgery (FLS) for early‐onset type I sFGR, whereas 41.5% (17/41) would offer either FLS or selective feticide, and 12.2% (5/41) would exclusively offer selective feticide. For early‐onset type II and type III sFGR cases, 25.9% (21/81) and 31.4% (22/70) would exclusively offer FLS, respectively, whereas 33.3% (27/81) and 32.9% (23/70) would exclusively offer selective feticide. Conclusions: There is significant variation in clinician practices and attitudes towards the management of early‐onset sFGR in MCDA twin pregnancies, especially for type II and type III cases, highlighting the need for high‐level evidence to guide management.
Publication status:
Published
Peer review status:
Peer reviewed

Actions


Access Document


Files:
Publisher copy:
10.1111/1471-0528.17891

Authors


More by this author
Role:
Author
ORCID:
0000-0003-3396-7464


More from this funder
Funder identifier:
https://ror.org/0187kwz08


Publisher:
Wiley
Journal:
BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology More from this journal
Publication date:
2024-07-02
Acceptance date:
2024-06-02
DOI:
EISSN:
1471-0528
ISSN:
1470-0328 and 1471-0528


Terms of use



Views and Downloads






If you are the owner of this record, you can report an update to it here: Report update to this record

TO TOP