Diagnosis and management of selective fetal growth restriction in monochorionic twin pregnancies: A cross-sectional international survey
Smriti Prasad,Asma Khalil,Jamie J Kirkham,Andrew Sharp,Kerry Woolfall,Tracy Karen Mitchell,Odai Yaghi,Tracey Ricketts,Mariana Popa,Zarko Alfirevic,Dilly Anumba,Richard Ashcroft,George Attilakos,Carolyn Bailie,Ahmet A Baschat,Christine Cornforth,Fabricio Da Silva Costa,Mark Denbow,Jan Deprest,Natasha Fenwick,Monique C Haak,Louise Hardman,Jane Harrold,Andy Healey,Kurt Hecher,Rajeswari Parasuraman,Lawrence Impey,Richard Jackson,Edward Johnstone,Shauna Leven,Liesbeth Lewi,Enrico Lopriore,Isabella Oconnor,Danielle Harding,Joel Marsden,Jessica Mendoza,Tommy Mousa,Surabhi Nanda,Aris T Papageorghiou,Dharmintra Pasupathy,Jane Sandall,Shakila Thangaratinam,Baskaran Thilaganathan,Mark Turner,Brigitte Vollmer,Michelle Watson,Karen Wilding,Yoav Yinon,FERN Study Team
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.17891
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.