Care levels for fetal therapy centers

Fetal therapies undertaken to improve fetal outcome or to optimize transition to neonate life often entail some level of maternal, fetal, or neonatal risk. A fetal therapy center needs access to resources to carry out such therapies and to manage maternal, fetal, and neonatal complications that might arise, either related to the therapy per se or as part of the underlying fetal or maternal condition. Accordingly, a fetal therapy center requires a dedicated operational infrastructure and necessary resources to allow for appropriate oversight and monitoring of clinical performance and to facilitate multidisciplinary collaboration between the relevant specialties. Three care levels for fetal therapy centers are proposed to match the anticipated care complexity, with appropriate resources to achieve an optimal outcome at an institutional and regional level. A level I fetal therapy center should be capable of offering fetal interventions that may be associated with obstetric risks of preterm birth or membrane rupture but that would be very unlikely to require maternal medical subspecialty or intensive care, with neonatal risks not exceeding those of moderate prematurity. A level II center should have the incremental capacity to provide maternal intensive care and to manage extreme neonatal prematurity. A level III therapy center should offer the full range of fetal interventions (including open fetal surgery) and be able manage any of the associated maternal complications and comorbidities, as well as have access to neonatal and pediatric surgical intervention including indicated surgery for neonates with congenital anomalies

Potential higher risk of tethered spinal cord in children after prenatal surgery for myelomeningocele:A systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on the incidence of secondary tethered spinal cord (TSC) between prenatal and postnatal closure in patients with MMC. The objectives was to understand the incidence of secondary TSC after prenatal surgery for MMC compared to postnatal surgery for MMC. Material and methods On May 4, 2023, a systematic search was conducted in Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to gather relevant data. Primary studies focusing on repair type, lesion level, and TSC were included, while non-English or non-Dutch reports, case reports, conference abstracts, editorials, letters, comments, and animal studies were excluded. Two reviewers assessed the included studies for bias risk, following PRISMA guidelines. TSC frequency in MMC closure types was determined, and the relationship between TSC occurrence and closure technique was analyzed using relative risk and Fisher's exact test. Subgroup analysis revealed relative risk differences based on study designs and follow-up periods. A total of ten studies, involving 2,724 patients, were assessed. Among them, 2,293 patients underwent postnatal closure, while 431 received prenatal closure for the MMC defect. In the prenatal closure group, TSC occurred in 21.6% (n = 93), compared to 18.8% (n = 432) in the postnatal closure group. The relative risk (RR) of TSC in patients with prenatal MMC closure versus postnatal MMC closure was 1.145 (95%CI 0.939 to 1.398). Fisher's exact test indicated a statistically non-significant association (p = 0.106) between TSC and closure technique. When considering only RCT and controlled cohort studies, the overall RR for TSC was 1.308 (95%CI 1.007 to 1.698) with a non-significant association (p = .053). For studies focusing on children up until early puberty (maximum 12 years follow-up), the RR for tethering was 1.104 (95%CI 0.876 to 1.391), with a non-significant association (p = 0.409). Conclusion and discussion This review found no significant increase in relative risk of TSC between prenatal and postnatal closure in MMC patients, but a trend of increased TSC in the prenatal group. More longterm data on TSC after fetal closure is needed for better counseling and outcomes in MMC.</p

Core Outcome Set for GROwth restriction: deVeloping Endpoints (COSGROVE).

BACKGROUND: Foetal growth restriction (FGR) refers to a foetus that does not reach its genetically predetermined growth potential. It is well recognised that growth-restricted foetuses are at increased risk of stillbirth, foetal compromise, early neonatal death and neonatal morbidity. Later in life, they are prone to health problems, including increased risk of cardiovascular diseases and neurodevelopmental disorders. Interventions for preventing and treating FGR have been studied in many trials, but evidence is often difficult to synthesise and compare because of differences in the selection and definition of outcomes. To enable future trials to measure similar, meaningful outcomes, we are developing two core outcome sets (COS) - one for prevention and the other for treatment of FGR. METHODS: We will review the literature to identify previously reported outcomes. An international panel of relevant stakeholders who have experience of FGR (parent or carer of a baby that was growth restricted, health professional involved in the care of mothers and babies affected by FGR, a person with expertise in FGR research) will rate the importance of each of those outcomes in a series of three sequential online rounds of a Delphi study. Participants will be able to add items to the proposed list in round 1. A final face-to-face consensus meeting will be held with representatives of each stakeholder group at which a final list of outcomes for inclusion in the COS will be agreed. DISCUSSION: The development of COSs in FGR will ensure the collection and reporting of a minimum dataset agreed by stakeholder consensus and will reduce inconsistencies in the reporting of outcomes across relevant trials. Such standardisation in the reporting of outcomes will improve synthesis of evidence and generalisability of knowledge in the future by reducing heterogeneity in outcomes between trials and thus improve the results of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Ultimately, we hope that the COSs will lead to an improvement in the quality of evidence-based clinical practice, enhance patient care, and improve the quality and consistency of research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable. This study is registered in the Core Outcome Measures for Effectiveness (COMET) database

Study protocol: developing, disseminating, and implementing a core outcome set for selective fetal growth restriction in monochorionic twin pregnancies.

BACKGROUND: Selective fetal growth restriction in monochorionic twin pregnancies is associated with an increased risk of perinatal mortality and morbidity and represents a clinical dilemma. Interventions include expectant management with early preterm delivery if there are signs of fetal compromise, selective termination of the compromised twin, fetoscopic laser coagulation of the communicating placental vessels or termination of the whole pregnancy. Previous studies evaluating interventions have reported many different outcomes and outcome measures. Such variation makes comparing, contrasting, and combining results challenging, limiting ongoing research on this uncommon condition to inform clinical practice. We aim to produce, disseminate, and implement a core outcome set for selective fetal growth restriction research in monochorionic twin pregnancies. METHODS: An international steering group, including professionals, researchers, and lay experts, has been established to oversee the development of this core outcome set. The methods have been guided by the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative Handbook. Potential core outcomes will be developed by undertaking a systematic review of studies evaluating interventions for selective fetal growth restriction in monochorionic twin pregnancies. Potential core outcomes will be entered into a three-round Delphi survey and key stakeholders including clinical professionals, researchers, and lay experts will be invited to participate. Repeated reflection and rescoring of individual outcomes should encourage group and individual stakeholder convergence towards consensus outcomes which will be entered into a modified Nominal Group Technique to finalize the core outcome set. Once core outcomes have been agreed, we will establish standardized definitions and recommend high-quality measurement instruments for each outcome. DISCUSSION: The development, dissemination, and implementation of a core outcome set for selective fetal growth restriction should ensure that future research protocols select, collect, and report outcomes and outcome measures in a standardized manner. Data synthesis will be possible on a broad level and rigorous implementation should advance the quality of research studies and their effective use in order to guide clinical practice, improve patient care, maternal, short-term perinatal outcomes, and long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) registration number: 998. International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) registration number: CRD42018092697 . 18th April 2018

multicenter cohort study

Publisher Copyright: © 2023 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.Objective: Monochorionic (MC) triplet pregnancies are extremely rare and information on these pregnancies and their complications is limited. We aimed to investigate the risk of early and late pregnancy complications, perinatal outcome and the timing and methods of fetal intervention in these pregnancies. Methods: This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study of MC triamniotic (TA) triplet pregnancies managed in 21 participating centers around the world from 2007 onwards. Data on maternal age, mode of conception, diagnosis of major fetal structural anomalies or aneuploidy, gestational age (GA) at diagnosis of anomalies, twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome (TTTS), twin anemia–polycythemia sequence (TAPS), twin reversed arterial perfusion (TRAP) sequence and or selective fetal growth restriction (sFGR) were retrieved from patient records. Data on antenatal interventions were collected, including data on selective fetal reduction (three to two or three to one), laser surgery and any other active fetal intervention (including amniodrainage). Data on perinatal outcome were collected, including numbers of live birth, intrauterine demise, neonatal death, perinatal death and termination of fetus or pregnancy (TOP). Neonatal data such as GA at birth, birth weight, admission to neonatal intensive care unit and neonatal morbidity were also collected. Perinatal outcomes were assessed according to whether the pregnancy was managed expectantly or underwent fetal intervention. Results: Of an initial cohort of 174 MCTA triplet pregnancies, 11 underwent early TOP, three had an early miscarriage, six were lost to follow-up and one was ongoing at the time of writing. Thus, the study cohort included 153 pregnancies, of which the majority (92.8%) were managed expectantly. The incidence of pregnancy affected by one or more fetal structural abnormality was 13.7% (21/153) and that of TRAP sequence was 5.2% (8/153). The most common antenatal complication related to chorionicity was TTTS, which affected just over one quarter (27.6%; 42/152, after removing a pregnancy with TOP < 24 weeks for fetal anomalies) of the pregnancies, followed by sFGR (16.4%; 25/152), while TAPS (spontaneous or post TTTS with or without laser treatment) occurred in only 4.6% (7/152) of pregnancies. No monochorionicity-related antenatal complication was recorded in 49.3% (75/152) of pregnancies. Survival was apparently associated largely with the development of these complications: there was at least one survivor beyond the neonatal period in 85.1% (57/67) of pregnancies without antenatal complications, in 100% (25/25) of those complicated by sFGR and in 47.6% (20/42) of those complicated by TTTS. The overall rate of preterm birth prior to 28 weeks was 14.5% (18/124) and that prior to 32 weeks' gestation was 49.2% (61/124). Conclusion: Monochorionicity-related complications, which can impact adversely perinatal outcome, occur in almost half of MCTA triplet pregnancies, creating a challenge with regard to counseling, surveillance and management.publishersversionpublishe

External validation of prognostic models predicting pre-eclampsia : individual participant data meta-analysis

Abstract Background Pre-eclampsia is a leading cause of maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity. Early identification of women at risk during pregnancy is required to plan management. Although there are many published prediction models for pre-eclampsia, few have been validated in external data. Our objective was to externally validate published prediction models for pre-eclampsia using individual participant data (IPD) from UK studies, to evaluate whether any of the models can accurately predict the condition when used within the UK healthcare setting. Methods IPD from 11 UK cohort studies (217,415 pregnant women) within the International Prediction of Pregnancy Complications (IPPIC) pre-eclampsia network contributed to external validation of published prediction models, identified by systematic review. Cohorts that measured all predictor variables in at least one of the identified models and reported pre-eclampsia as an outcome were included for validation. We reported the model predictive performance as discrimination (C-statistic), calibration (calibration plots, calibration slope, calibration-in-the-large), and net benefit. Performance measures were estimated separately in each available study and then, where possible, combined across studies in a random-effects meta-analysis. Results Of 131 published models, 67 provided the full model equation and 24 could be validated in 11 UK cohorts. Most of the models showed modest discrimination with summary C-statistics between 0.6 and 0.7. The calibration of the predicted compared to observed risk was generally poor for most models with observed calibration slopes less than 1, indicating that predictions were generally too extreme, although confidence intervals were wide. There was large between-study heterogeneity in each model’s calibration-in-the-large, suggesting poor calibration of the predicted overall risk across populations. In a subset of models, the net benefit of using the models to inform clinical decisions appeared small and limited to probability thresholds between 5 and 7%. Conclusions The evaluated models had modest predictive performance, with key limitations such as poor calibration (likely due to overfitting in the original development datasets), substantial heterogeneity, and small net benefit across settings. The evidence to support the use of these prediction models for pre-eclampsia in clinical decision-making is limited. Any models that we could not validate should be examined in terms of their predictive performance, net benefit, and heterogeneity across multiple UK settings before consideration for use in practice. Trial registration PROSPERO ID: CRD42015029349