Vasa Previa in Singleton Pregnancies: Diagnosis and Clinical Management Based on an International Expert Consensus
Yinka OYELESE,Ali JAVINANI,Brittany GUDANOWSKI,Eyal KRISPIN,Andrei REBARBER,Ranjit AKOLEKAR,Val CATANZARITE,Rohan D’SOUZA,Richard BRONSTEEN,Anthony ODIBO,Matthias A. SCHEIER,Junichi HASEGAWA,Eric JAUNIAUX,LEES Christoph,Deepa SRINIVASAN,Elizabeth DALY-JONES,Gregory DUNCOMBE,Yaacov MELCER,Ron MAYMON,Robert SILVER,Federico PREFUMO,Daisuke TACHIBANA,Wolfgang HENRICH,Robert CINCOTTA,Scott A. SHAINKER,Angela C. RANZINI,Ashley S. ROMAN,Ramen CHMAIT,Edgar A. HERNANDEZ-ANDRADE,Daniel L. ROLNIK,Waldo SEPULVEDA,Alireza A. SHAMSHIRSAZ,Christoph LEES
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2024.03.013
IF: 9.8
2024-03-18
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Abstract:Background There are limited data to guide the diagnosis and management of vasa previa. Currently, what is known is largely based on case reports or series and cohort studies. Objective (s): To systematically collect and classify expert opinions and achieve consensus on the diagnosis and clinical management of vasa previa using focus group discussions (FGD) and a Delphi technique. Study Design A four-round FGD and a three-round Delphi survey of an international panel of experts on vasa previa were conducted. Experts were selected based on their publication record on vasa previa. First, we convened an FGD panel of 20 experts and agreed on which issues were unresolved in the diagnosis and management of vasa previa. A three-round anonymous electronic survey was then sent to the full expert panel. Survey questions were presented on the diagnosis and management of vasa previa that the experts were asked to rate on a 5-point Likert scale (from strongly disagree = 1 to strongly agree = 5). Consensus was defined as a median score of 5. Following responses to each round, any statements that had median scores of 3 or less were deemed to have had no consensus and excluded. Statements with a median score of 4 were revised and re-presented to the experts in the next round. Consensus and non-consensus statements were then aggregated. Results Sixty-eight international experts were invited to participate in the study, of which 57 participated. Experts were from 13 countries on five continents and have contributed to over 80% of published cohort studies on vasa previa, as well as national and international society guidelines. Completion rates were 84%, 93%, 91% for the first, second, and third rounds, respectively, and 71% completed all three rounds. The panel reached a consensus on 26 statements regarding the diagnosis and key points of management of vasa previa, including: 1) While there is no agreement on a distance between the fetal vessels and the cervical internal os to define vasa previa, the definition should not be limited to a 2 cm distance; 2) All pregnancies should be screened for vasa previa with routine examination for placental cord insertion and a color Doppler sweep of the region over the cervix at the second-trimester anatomy scan; 3) When a low-lying placenta or placenta previa is found in the second trimester, a transvaginal ultrasound with Doppler should be performed at around 32 weeks to rule out vasa previa; 4) Outpatient management of asymptomatic patients without risk factors for preterm birth is reasonable; 5)Asymptomatic patients with vasa previa should be delivered by scheduled cesarean between 35- and 37-weeks of gestation; and 6) There was no agreement on routine hospitalization, avoidance of intercourse, or use of 3-dimensional ultrasound for diagnosis of vasa previa. Conclusions Through FGD and a Delphi process, an international expert panel reached consensus on the definition, screening, clinical management, and timing of delivery in vasa previa, which could inform the development of new clinical guidelines.
obstetrics & gynecology