Are there still obstetric and perinatal benefits for selective embryo reduction of triplet pregnancies?

Abstract

We present in this study the results of a retrospective analysis comparing a group of ongoing triplet pregnancies and a group of triplet pregnancies reduced to twins. These two groups were managed in the same way between January 1993 and April 1996 in hospital. Mean gestational age at birth was comparable in both groups of patients. Prematurity rate was lower in the reduced pregnancies group (62.5 versus 95.6%, P < 0.05). Severe prematurity (< 32 weeks) was not different in the two groups. The percentage of Caesarean section was lower in the reduced group (23.5 versus 70.8%, P < 0.01). No significant difference was observed for perinatal mortality. Newborns of ongoing triplet pregnancies had a higher percentage (67.7 versus 86.8%) of hospitalization in the intensive neonatal care unit and a tendency towards lower birthweight. The differences observed in this study do not seem to represent a decisive benefit for reducing triplet pregnancies. Due to the progress in the management of multiple pregnancies and neonatal intensive care, we think that embryo reduction should no longer be justified by obstetric benefits but rather as a possibility offered to couples who could be confronted with the potential severe psychological, social and economic problems of triple births.