S'abonner

Fetal reduction of triplet pregnancies to twins vs singletons: a meta-analysis of survival and pregnancy outcome - 23/08/22

Doi : 10.1016/j.ajog.2022.03.050 
Kamran Hessami, MD a, Mark I. Evans, MD b, c, Ahmed A. Nassr, MD, PhD a, Jimmy Espinoza, MD a, Roopali V. Donepudi, MD a, Magdalena Sanz Cortes, MD, PhD a, Eyal Krispin, MD a, Shayan Mostafaei, PhD d, Michael A. Belfort, MD, PhD a, Alireza A. Shamshirsaz, MD a,
a Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Baylor College of Medicine and Texas Children’s Fetal Center, Texas Children’s Hospital Pavilion for Women, Houston, TX 
b Comprehensive Genetics, PLLC, New York, NY 
c Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 
d Division of Clinical Geriatrics, Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden 

Corresponding author: Alireza A. Shamshirsaz, MD.

Abstract

Objective

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the fetal survival rate and perinatal outcomes of triplet pregnancies after selective reduction to twin pregnancies vs singleton pregnancies.

Data Sources

PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase were systematically searched from the inception of the databases to January 16, 2022.

Study Eligibility Criteria

Studies comparing the survival and perinatal outcomes between reduction to twin pregnancies and reduction to singleton pregnancies were included. The primary outcomes were fetal survival, defined as a live birth at >24 weeks of gestation. The secondary outcomes were gestational age at birth, preterm birth at <32 and <34 weeks of gestation, early pregnancy loss (<24 weeks of gestation), low birthweight, and rate of neonatal demise (up to 28 days after birth).

Methods

The random-effect model was used to pool the mean differences or odds ratios and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals. To provide a range of expected effects if a new study was conducted, 95% prediction intervals were calculated for outcomes presented in >3 studies.

Results

Of note, 10 studies with 2543 triplet pregnancies undergoing fetal reduction, of which 2035 reduced to twin pregnancies and 508 reduced to singleton pregnancies, met the inclusion criteria. Reduction to twin pregnancies had a lower rate of fetal survival (odds ratio, 0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.40–0.92; P=.02; 95% prediction interval, 0.36–1.03) and comparable rates of early pregnancy loss (odds ratio, 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.58–1.38; P=.61; 95% prediction interval, 0.54–1.48) and neonatal demise (odds ratio, 0.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.09–3.50; P=.55) than reduction to singleton pregnancies. Reduction to twin pregnancies had a significantly lower gestation age at birth (weeks) (mean difference, −2.20; 95% confidence interval, −2.80 to −1.61; P<.001; 95% prediction interval, −4.27 to −0.14) than reduction to singleton pregnancies. Furthermore, reduction to twin pregnancies was associated with lower birthweight and greater risk of preterm birth at <32 and <34 weeks of gestation.

Conclusion

Triplet pregnancies reduced to twin pregnancies had a lower fetal survival rate of all remaining fetuses, lower gestational age at birth, higher risk of preterm birth, and lower birthweight than triplet pregnancies reduced to singleton pregnancies; reduction to twin pregnancies vs reduction to singleton pregnancies showed no substantial difference for the rates of early pregnancy loss and neonatal death.

Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.

Key words : fetal reduction, meta-analysis, pregnancy outcome, triplet pregnancy, twin pregnancy


Plan


 The authors report no conflict of interest.


© 2022  Elsevier Inc. Tous droits réservés.
Ajouter à ma bibliothèque Retirer de ma bibliothèque Imprimer
Export

    Export citations

  • Fichier

  • Contenu

Vol 227 - N° 3

P. 430 - septembre 2022 Retour au numéro
Article précédent Article précédent
  • Long-term health outcomes of children born to mothers with hyperemesis gravidarum: a systematic review and meta-analysis
  • Kelly Nijsten, Larissa A.W. Jansen, Jacqueline Limpens, Martijn J.J. Finken, Marjette H. Koot, Iris J. Grooten, Tessa J. Roseboom, Rebecca C. Painter
| Article suivant Article suivant
  • Does vaginal progesterone prevent recurrent preterm birth in women with a singleton gestation and a history of spontaneous preterm birth? Evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis
  • Agustin Conde-Agudelo, Roberto Romero

Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.

Déjà abonné à cette revue ?

Mon compte


Plateformes Elsevier Masson

Déclaration CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM est déclaré à la CNIL, déclaration n° 1286925.

En application de la loi nº78-17 du 6 janvier 1978 relative à l'informatique, aux fichiers et aux libertés, vous disposez des droits d'opposition (art.26 de la loi), d'accès (art.34 à 38 de la loi), et de rectification (art.36 de la loi) des données vous concernant. Ainsi, vous pouvez exiger que soient rectifiées, complétées, clarifiées, mises à jour ou effacées les informations vous concernant qui sont inexactes, incomplètes, équivoques, périmées ou dont la collecte ou l'utilisation ou la conservation est interdite.
Les informations personnelles concernant les visiteurs de notre site, y compris leur identité, sont confidentielles.
Le responsable du site s'engage sur l'honneur à respecter les conditions légales de confidentialité applicables en France et à ne pas divulguer ces informations à des tiers.


Tout le contenu de ce site: Copyright © 2024 Elsevier, ses concédants de licence et ses contributeurs. Tout les droits sont réservés, y compris ceux relatifs à l'exploration de textes et de données, a la formation en IA et aux technologies similaires. Pour tout contenu en libre accès, les conditions de licence Creative Commons s'appliquent.