Targeted first-trimester prenatal diagnosis before fetal reduction in triplet gestations and subsequent outcome

13Citations
Citations of this article
28Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objective: To assess the feasibility of targeted first-trimester ultrasound evaluation in triplet gestations and to report the outcome in reduced and expectantly managed triplets. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of 127 triplets at 11-14 weeks with targeted ultrasound examination including nucbal translucency (NT) screening. Results: One or more abnormal findings were observed in 33 of 381 fetuses (8.7%), including increased NT (n = 18), malformations (n = 4), aneuploidy (n = 3), relative intrauterine growth restriction (n = 2) or spontaneous demise (n = 13). Of 63 patients (49%) who chose reduction, selective termination due to abnormal findings was performed in 13 fetuses. The rates of complete abortion < 24 weeks were 9.8% and 3.2% for those with expectant management and fetal reduction, respectively. Expectantly managed triplets delivered significantly earlier (31.1 ± 3.8 vs. 35.64 ± 3.3 weeks) (P < 0.01) with a lower mean birth weight (1483 ± 552 g vs. 2305 ± 557 g) (P < 0.01) and a lower number of liveborn fetuses (85.6% vs. 97.4%) (P < 0.01) than those reduced. Conclusion: Targeted first-trimester ultrasound is feasible and reliable in triplet gestations and should be an integral part of the counseling process. It results in more accurate selection for those who consider fetal reduction. Our data further support fetal reduction as a valuable strategy to improve perinatal outcome in triplet pregnancies. Copyright © 2004 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Geipel, A., Berg, C., Katalinic, A., Plath, H., Hansmann, M., Smrcek, J., … Germer, U. (2004). Targeted first-trimester prenatal diagnosis before fetal reduction in triplet gestations and subsequent outcome. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 24(7), 724–729. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.1783

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free