Abstract
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 or 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, monitoring of clinical performance, and to facilitate multidisciplinary collaboration between the relevant specialties. Three care levels for fetal therapy centers are proposed in order to match the anticipated care complexity with appropriate resources to achieve an optimal outcome at an institutional and regional level. A level 1 fetal therapy center should be capable of offering fetal interventions that may be associated with obstetric risks of preterm birth or membrane rupture, but which would be very unlikely to require maternal medical subspecialty or intensive care, with neonatal risks not exceeding those of moderate prematurity. A level 2 center should have the incremental capacity to provide maternal intensive care and to manage extreme neonatal prematurity. A level 3 therapy center should offer the full range of fetal interventions (including open fetal surgery), and could 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.
Precis:
Three care levels for fetal therapy centers are proposed based on the resources needed to carry out interventions and manage maternal, fetal, and neonatal risks.
INTRODUCTION
Fetal therapy, performed for the benefit of the fetus and neonate, has evolved markedly over the last three decades1, 2. This is reflected in the increasing membership of fetal therapy centers in the North American Fetal Therapy Network (NAFTNet), and by the number and complexity of interventions cumulatively performed at these centers3, 4. All fetal interventions, whether medical or surgical, are by definition performed on a pregnant individual before separation of the fetus from the placenta at birth. As such, they may entail maternal risks in either the current or future pregnancies, as well as fetal or neonatal risks. While this document refers to fetal interventions, recommendations are intended to prioritize safety for both the pregnant individual and their fetus or neonate based on the available evidence.
To perform any fetal intervention, provide all the associated care needs, address any potential risks and assess outcomes, a fetal therapy center requires a dedicated operational infrastructure, which encourages and facilitates the close collaboration of healthcare professionals (HCP) from maternal, fetal, nursing, anesthetic and pediatric specialties5,6,7. Several of these specialties, specifically obstetrics/maternal-fetal medicine (MFM), pediatric surgery and neonatology, already have established levels of care8,9,10. These are based on the guiding principle of matching resources with the anticipated complexity of care to achieve optimal outcomes at an institutional and regional level8, 9, 10, 11. These care levels are independently assigned for each of these specialties and may not coexist at the same level at a single institution. Guidelines issued by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM), American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) have outlined the general operational infrastructure necessary for centers to perform fetal diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, but have not stratified these guidelines by the risk profile of individual interventions.
GOAL
The purpose of this document is to propose levels of care for fetal therapy centers based on the anticipated complexity of an intervention for both pregnant individuals and their neonates. Our recommendations will also consider the obstetric, neonatal, pediatric (medical and surgical) and ethical care resources that should be in place to support such fetal interventions. Our guiding principle is to provide maternal safety and autonomy, while also addressing the anticipated care needs of the fetus and neonate.
FETAL INTERVENTIONS AND THE PRACTICE OF FETAL THERAPY
The goal of fetal therapy may be to achieve a prenatal cure, attenuate or improve sequelae for the infant, or optimize the transition to postnatal life. When presented with a prenatal diagnosis, a pregnant individual may choose to pursue expectant management, fetal therapy, pregnancy termination, active neonatal care or palliation12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17. It is the duty of the fetal therapy center to support those decisions with the appropriate level of care, regardless of the management choice.
A fetal therapy center must provide a pregnant individual with an understanding of the fetal condition, and the relative maternal and fetal risks and benefits of any proposed intervention, when considering management options. The ability to appropriately counsel patients relies on diagnostic capabilities that enable an estimate of fetal risk based on an accurate prenatal diagnosis and an understanding of the natural history of the disease and its overall prognosis.
The risks of any fetal intervention l depends on the i) technical details of the procedure including its complexity, the fetal status, degree of compromise and gestational age, ii) presence of maternal comorbidities (e.g. high body mass index (BMI), obstetric risk factors for preterm birth or membrane rupture, and iii) operator and center’s experience18–27. A comprehensive maternal assessment of psychosocial, familial, social, moral, religious, ethical and financial influences are elements to be considered in the planning of the patient’s care28, 29.
Risk-benefit assessment will differ according to the specific intervention, and by practitioner and fetal therapy center. If care can be better provided at another facility, referral should be considered.
Informed consent for fetal therapy is unique because interventions for the benefit of the fetus are performed on the pregnant individual. This emphasizes the need for a non-directive, shared decision-making approach that allows the pregnant individual to make an autonomous, intentional and voluntary choice, free of any coercion or undue influence from family members, spouses, partners or even HCP’s themselves, to undergo or decline any fetal therapy. A thorough discussion with patients needs to clearly present the full range of therapeutic options, their risks and benefits for the fetus, as well as any potential risks to the pregnant individual in the current or future pregnancies. An important, conversation that should precede any fetal intervention, particularly in a sick or very premature fetus, is the management of procedure-related fetal complications, specifically addressing whether delivery or non-intervention is to be undertaken, with clear discussion of all consequences. These conversations are best held in collaboration with MFM, neonatology and additional specialties as required by the condition and may benefit from the involvement of an unbiased and specially trained independent advocate, such as their primary HCP, perinatal nurse, or religious advisor29–33.
UNIVERSAL CORE COMPONENTS AND OPERATIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF A FETAL THERAPY CENTER
Certain resources are fundamental to optimize the provision of care and to minimize any fetal therapy procedure-related risks. Universal core components of a fetal therapy center as designated by several professional societies are summarized in Box 12, 5, 7. The need for additional resources, that may be required for specific interventions, should be considered in the context of the proposed fetal therapy center care levels.
Box 1. Itemized Core Components for the General Practice of Fetal Therapy.
Oversight
Medical director of fetal therapy center: direction and oversight of all fetal therapy operations
Nursing director of fetal therapy center: direction and oversight of all fetal therapy care
Multidisciplinary group of caregivers: direction and oversight of disease specific care-paths and therapies through multi-disciplinary input – Implementation of interventions through a predefined team approach
Regular, (at least monthly) multi-disciplinary patient care case conferences: planning and reviewing patient care and outcomes
Accredited diagnostic services
Prenatal ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, and fetal echocardiography: accurate diagnosis of fetal condition and monitoring of therapy
Genetics: diagnosis and counseling regarding genetic diseases
Access to reference laboratory and pathology services: chemistry, hematology, immunology, histology, metabolic and infection diagnostic tests
Electronic medical record and picture archiving and communicating systems for patient related diagnostic and care-related information
Maternal care services
Obstetric services/maternal–fetal medicine: management of maternal and obstetric care needs and complications
Obstetric anesthesia: maternal management during obstetric or fetal interventions
Adult medicine: consultation, co-management of maternal medical conditions, or complications of pregnancy or treatment
Intensive care unit: management of maternal critical illness related to pregnancy or treatment
Neonatal and pediatric care services
Neonatology: prenatal consultation; bridge to post-natal follow-up, neonatal care
Pediatrics: prenatal consultation, neonatal and pediatric management
Pediatric surgery: prenatal consultation and postdelivery management
Pediatric anesthesia: fetal management during interventions
Respiratory technologist or anesthetic assistant: fetal management during interventions
Pediatric cardiology: Prenatal diagnosis and consultation, postnatal management, fetal hemodynamic monitoring during complex procedures or transplacental medical therapy, neonatal cardiac care
Additional care services
Social work and spiritual support: coordination of social services, patient advocacy
Patient services coordinator, financial counselor: scheduling of appointments, financial planning assistance and insurance authorization across all involved care specialties
Data coordinator: tracking and facilitating the reporting of outcomes related data of the fetal therapy center
Interpreting and cultural diversity specialist: consultation, consent, follow up services with availability especially when multiple therapeutic options are being entertained
Family planning: safe pregnancy termination and contraception counseling
Palliative care: palliative neonatal care, perinatal hospice services
Research regulatory and ethics
Institutional research review boards (IRB): oversight of experimental and research-related interventions
Medical ethicist: consultation and oversight as needed, for research and ethical questions that arise during clinical care
Database and IT support: data collection for sharing, reporting QI, and research
Data from Moon-Grady AJ, Baschat A, Cass D, Choolani M, Copel JA, Crombleholme TM, et al. Fetal Treatment 2017: The Evolution of Fetal Therapy Centers - A Joint Opinion from the International Fetal Medicine and Surgical Society (IFMSS) and the North American Fetal Therapy Network (NAFTNet). Fetal Diagn Ther 2017;42:241–8. doi: 10.1159/000475929
IRB= institutional review board, IT= Information technology, PACS=picture archiving & communication system, EMR= electronic medical record, QI=quality improvement
I. Leadership
A fetal therapy center should have a medical director, a physician with experience in maternal and fetal care and specifically in maternal-fetal interventions. The medical director is responsible for operational oversight over the delivery of clinical care and ensuring patient safety. The medical director should work in partnership with a nursing director, who supervises the nursing staff and shares in the oversight of patient care and center operations. Others may be appointed in allied leadership roles, depending on the operational set-up at a particular fetal therapy center. While fetal therapy is not a recognized subspecialty, its practice demands advanced understanding and training in fetal physiology, expertise in prenatal diagnosis, fetal imaging and surveillance, and operative skills to safely perform fetal interventions.
II. Staffing
A fetal therapy center requires a multidisciplinary and closely collaborative group of healthcare personnel. In addition to providing safe and effective fetal therapy, a center’s team should facilitate a positive care environment and experience by providing pregnant individuals and their families with access to resources that facilitate managing their expectations and coping with their stress and grief. Nurses with expertise in fetal diagnosis and prenatal care play a central role in fetal therapy centers and may be involved in the patients’ and referring providers’ initial contact with the center, throughout prenatal evaluation, counseling, fetal intervention and follow-up33, 34. A financial counselor or insurance specialist may assist in reviewing a patient’s health care coverage and initiate insurance authorization if required. A nurse coordinator or licensed social worker may help manage the psychosocial needs of the patient and family and act as an advocate. Geneticists and genetic counselors can refine the genetic testing strategy, discuss results with families and help to arrange relevant autopsy examinations when indicated. Key members of any team are practitioners who are skilled in performing the fetal interventions. Other medical specialists should be involved as required in each case. A perinatal or pediatric palliative care service is important for cases in which a fetal death or complicated neonatal course are anticipated.
A data coordinator is invaluable in ensuring that key indicators of care quality and outcome are monitored and can be audited and reported to internal and external registries, funding agencies and patients, as needed2. Given the ethical challenges entailed in certain, particularly innovative, fetal interventions, the involvement of the institutional ethics committee in such circumstances is vital.2,28–30
III. Diagnostic Services
A fetal therapy center needs to have access to appropriate diagnostic services for all conditions that they intend to manage. This includes imaging specialists skilled in the performance of detailed fetal ultrasonography, fetal echocardiography and cardiovascular imaging, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Imaging expertise has to include prognostic staging for conditions such as congenital pulmonary airway malformations (CPAM)34, congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH)35, congenital heart disease (CHD)36. 37, fetal hydrops38, twin-twin transfusion syndrome (TTTS)39, 40, 41, as well as ultrasonography for procedural guidance. MRIs should be interpreted by a board-certified imaging radiologist, with specific expertise in fetal MRI. For complex cardiac conditions, a pediatric cardiologist with expertise in fetal echocardiography and postnatal cardiac management must be involved.
All imaging personnel I should be accredited with their respective professional membership associations, e.g. Registry of Diagnostic Medical Sonographers (RDMS), American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine (AIUM), American College of Radiology (ACR) or Canadian Association of Radiologists (CAR). They should maintain their required competencies and regularly participate in continuing medical education (CME), which will enhance the quality of the services that they provide42. A fetal therapy center needs access to the full range of genetic, microbiology, hematology, pathology, and laboratory services with the requisite expertise to allow the correct interpretation of fetal test results43–47.
IV. Facilities needed to offer fetal therapy and maternal, fetal and neonatal care
Appropriate clinical facilities should be identified where fetal interventions can be performed, and where post-procedure monitoring and recovery of the pregnant patient and fetus(es) can occur. Depending on the nature of the procedure and gestational age, this may be in the imaging facility, fetal medicine unit, operating room, or labor & delivery (L&D) suite. After fetal viability, all fetal therapy procedures should be performed in areas with access to a L&D suite and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Operative and monitoring equipment needs to be available and should be regularly serviced. The capacity for rapid provision of red blood cell or platelets for intrauterine transfusion as well as medications for fetal administration is necessary at any fetal therapy center.
V. Policies, Organization, Conduct and Governance
Fetal therapy centers should offer evidence-based therapies that are subject to institutional oversight, and provide transparent and complete reporting of maternal and fetal outcomes. Innovative interventions, including any that entail substantial modification to accepted protocols or procedures, should be undertaken only with prior in-depth discussion, review and consensus-based approval by the relevant subspecialties and potential consultation with an institutional ethics committee or panel48, 49. Research must be conducted with IRB approval and oversight including registration as a clinical trial when appropriate. The fetal therapies that are offered, their eligibility criteria, as well as the mechanisms to introduce new therapies, should be clearly established at each institution and reviewed periodically, as part of a formal institutional or departmental quality assurance process.
For those who choose pregnancy termination, a process should be in place to ensure access including referral to another accommodating practitioner or facility if abortion services are not available at the fetal center50.
VI. Fetal Therapy Oversight
A multidisciplinary fetal therapy advisory committee ideally includes representation from a variety of healthcare workers including MFM specialists, pediatric surgeons, anesthesiologists, neonatologists, geneticists, social workers, nurses, perinatal medical ethicists and other ad hoc members, as appropriate, who may or may not be involved in the direct care of the patient. The composition, role and responsibilities of such a committee may be modified, depending on the specific needs of a fetal therapy center and could range from quality assurance or audit through clinical oversight. Committee members might review proposed interventions which are considered (locally) innovative or experimental, evaluate research proposals before their submission, participate in trial related data safety monitoring boards, or conduct case reviews.
VII. Maintenance of competency and center performance
Achieving optimal maternal and fetal outcomes is dependent on a number of factors including practitioner and team experience, local resources and setting, case volume, ongoing audit and maintenance of competency of the whole healthcare team51–53. The association between surgical volume and improved outcomes has been attributed to multiple factors including team proficiency, and their ability to triage, recognize and manage specific complications within a particular health care system54–60.
Developing relevant, agreed upon outcome measures for specific interventions, which are frequently evaluated and monitored, will help to prospectively evaluate fetal intervention risks, as well as the overall performance of fetal therapy treatments. Outcomes relevant for any fetal intervention include i) PPROM, preterm birth, mode of delivery, stillbirth or neonatal demise, ii) maternal complications such as hemorrhage, infection, pulmonary edema or ICU admission, iii) the frequency with which the intended treatment outcome was achieved, and iv) the impact on future fertility and pregnancy outcomes2–7, 61. Core outcome sets are being developed in fetal medicine and currently exist for twins, TTTS, CDH, fetal myelomeningocele closure and fetal growth restriction6, 61–64. Centers should also develop or participate in needs-specific CME and quality improvement programs, which may include the use of simulation training models, to help develop and maintain their competence in specific fetal interventions65–67.
FETAL THERAPY CENTER CARE LEVELS – PRINCIPAL CONSIDERATIONS
A fetal therapy center needs to have all of the resources to carry out fetal interventions and to manage any maternal, fetal or neonatal complications that might arise. We are proposing a three-tiered model to optimize the delivery of care at each level of case complexity, which may entail regionalized concentration of some subspecialized healthcare services7–11. The underlying fetal condition, type of intervention and expected treatment outcomes are the primary factors determining these proposed tiers and resource settings. Intervention-related risks can occur independent of experience or case volume, and particularly maternal complication rates tend to be underreported68–75. Patient safety requires a care setting that, at very least, can manage common (>1%), as well as infrequent but severe complications7, 75,76. The care level documents for maternal8, neonatal9 and pediatric surgery10 provide the underlying framework that was adapted for fetal therapy centers.
Maternal Levels of Care
Aside from accredited birth centers, maternal care settings have been stratified into four levels in the USA. Of these, levels III (subspecialty care) and IV (regional perinatal center) have board certified obstetricians, MFM subspecialists, obstetric anesthesiologists and adult subspecialists, with ICU facilities on site that accept individuals who are pregnant or in the postpartum period; both levels III and IV allow access to the full range of expertise that may be necessary for any maternal or fetal intervention8,9,10, 76, 77, 78. The on-site ICU care at a level IV center allows for primary or co-management by a MFM team with expertise in complex medical conditions, critically ill or unstable mothers.
Neonatal Levels of Care
Within the four neonatal care levels, level III and IV NICUs have attendant neonatologists, nurse practitioners, respiratory technologists and pediatric anesthesiology services either on-site, or readily available at an adjacent institution. While level III NICUs can provide prolonged support for all degrees of prematurity, the ability to provide on-site subspecialty care, including the surgical management of complex congenital abnormalities, is limited to level IV NICUs or pediatric ICUs (PICU) 9,10. Neonatal outcomes are improved the closer the delivery occurs to a pediatric center which can provide a full range of medical and surgical care79–85. All fetal interventions that may potentially result in (iatrogenic) preterm delivery after viability require, at least, level III NICU support. Complex neonatal management challenges, including those encountered with congenital anomalies, may benefit from access to a level IV NICU with subspecialty resources86–90. Surgical care of babies with congenital anomalies is optimized in the highest level pediatric surgery facility, which is required for level IV NICU or PICU designation9,10.
Considerations for Selecting Necessary Level of Care
Prior to performing any fetal intervention, factors such as gestational age, fetal condition, procedure-related maternal, fetal, or preterm delivery risks, as well as the potential need to deliver outside the patients’ community must be evaluated in order to determine whether the case can be managed locally or if transfer to a higher level facility should be considered. It is important that each fetal therapy center has strong institutional backing and that specific policies are in place to support a collaborative multispecialty model.
Risk profile and complexity of fetal interventions
The overall risk profile and complexity of any fetal intervention is related to its degree of invasiveness and the required interventional set-up. These factors also determine the type of anesthesia or analgesia required1, 2, as well as the need for maternal and fetal monitoring during and after the procedure. Neonatal risks are determined by the potential risk of delivery soon after the intervention, gestational age at the time of intervention, and the neonatal management needs specific to the fetal condition. Therefore, neonatal care needs can range from management of prematurity to multidisciplinary management of coexisting conditions. We propose that fetal interventions be categorized at three levels (1) needle-based, (2) percutaneous, (3) open or laparotomy. These levels dictate the resource setting in which these procedures can be safely performed.
Ultrasound-guided needle-based fetal therapy interventions):
For these procedures, a fine needle is advanced into a target under continuous ultrasound guidance. This approach is used for chorionic villous sampling, amniocentesis, amnioinfusion, amnioreduction, fetal fluid drainage, fetal blood sampling (FBS), intrauterine transfusion of blood products (IUT)91,92, direct delivery of fetal medications93, fetal or placental interstitial vascular occlusion94–97 and fetal cardiac interventions25 (Table 1). Needle-based procedures typically require only local anesthesia, but may occasionally require intravenous (IV) conscious sedation and, very rarely, neuraxial anesthesia98. The principal maternal risks include post-procedural pain, PPROM, preterm labor and the need for emergent delivery for fetal distress (Table 1). After viability, intra-operative fetal surveillance may be used to identify any signs of compromise that might require either intrauterine resuscitation or delivery. After the procedure, maternal monitoring for obstetric complications and fetal heart rate monitoring after viability are performed.
Table 1.
PROCEDURE | REPORTED PROCEDURAL RISKS | REQUIRED RESOURCES |
---|---|---|
Fetal blood sampling and transfusion19, 21, 70, 91, 92 Needle size: 22–20 gauge (outer diameter 0.71–0.91 mm) |
Maternal: Urgent delivery | Maternal: L&D unit if viable; OB anesthesiology for IV conscious sedation84 or rarely neuraxial anesthesia85 |
Fetal: Puncture site bleeding 20–30%; transient bradycardia 5–10%; fetal death 0.4%; up to 25% for complicated fetal disease and hydrops. |
Fetal: Trained intervention team, Blood bank for preparation of fetal blood products, medications for fetal paralysis/resuscitation. | |
Neonatal: Premature delivery (average gestational at birth: 31–35 weeks; condition specific) |
Neonatal: NICU if viable with subspecialty access for complex or severe conditions | |
Fetal cardiac interventions25, 81 Needle size 18–16 Gauge (outer diameter 1.27 – 1.65 mm) |
Maternal: Post-operative pain up to 32%; post-operative nausea or vomiting up to 26% |
Maternal: L&D unit if viable; OB anesthesiology for sedation / neuraxial / general anesthesia as required |
Fetal: Transient hemopericardium 18%–28%; ; Bradycardia up to 32; IUFD by 48 hours 10–30% |
Multidisciplinary fetal cardiac intervention team (Blood bank to prepare fetal blood products)** Medication for fetal paralysis/resuscitation |
|
Neonatal: Premature delivery (<37 weeks up to 20%; fetal death before discharge up to 61%) |
Neonatal: NICU, with pediatric cardiology / cardiac surgery, pediatric anesthesiology and subspecialty access | |
Radiofrequency, microwave, or interstitial laser ablation95–97, 100, 101 Instrumentsize: 18–16 Gauge (outer diameter 1.27–1.65 mm) |
Maternal: Myometrial bleeding <1% |
Maternal: Dedicated intervention setting, OB Anesthesiology for IV conscious sedation and, rarely, neuraxial anesthesia; L&D unit for post-procedure monitoring |
Fetal: Miscarriage within 2 weeks 3%; thermal injury of co-twin 2%; co-twin demise 10–16%; PPROM within 2 weeks 2–9% | Fetal: Trained intervention team | |
Neonatal: Premature delivery (<32 weeks 9–18%; <37 weeks 9–18%) |
Neonatal: NICU after viability |
Legend: Ø = diameter, OB anesthesiology = Obstetric Anesthesiology, LUTO = lower urinary tract obstruction, L&D = Labor & Delivery, NICU = neonatal intensive care unit, PTB = preterm birth, PPROM = preterm premature rupture of membranes.
Not typically used, but may be required on a case by case basis in the absence of fetal compromise.
Percutaneous fetal interventions
Percutaneous interventions include ultrasound-guided bipolar cord coagulation99, 100, radio frequency ablation (RFA)101, shunt procedures102–110 and fetoscopy for laser umbilical cord occlusion111, laser ablation of placental vascular anastomoses112, 113, fetoscopic endotracheal occlusion (FETO)114, amniotic band resection115 and percutaneous fetal myelomeningocele closure116–119 (Table 2). Fetoscopic interventions or bipolar forceps procedures are performed using a combination of ultrasound guidance and direct visualization entering the uterus directly or through a sheath. Percutaneous fetoscopic fetal myelomeningocele closure notably may employ multiple ports. With increasing invasiveness, procedure duration and complexity, the anesthetic requirements increase correspondingly, from local anesthesia to conscious IV sedation (monitored by the anesthesiology team) to neuraxial or general anesthesia. Following these type of procedures, surgical complications, such as trocar site bleeding, intraperitoneal amniotic fluid or CO2 leakage, and occasionally even pulmonary edema or need for ICU admission may be encountered. These risks, as well as the potential obstetric complications of PPROM and preterm labor, require maternal or fetal post-procedure monitoring on a L&D unit, and occasionally access to adult ICU services. Patients undergoing FETO may require the emergent removal of a tracheal balloon, necessitating 24/7 availability of an Ex-utero Intrapartum Treatment (EXIT) team, in the event that a balloon is still in-situ if preterm labor occurs and cannot be removed either by ultrasound- guided needle puncture or fetoscopically114, 120, 121. Following delivery, neonates with spina bifida or CDH are likely to need management in a level III-IV NICU or PICU.
Table 2.
PROCEDURE | REPORTED PROCEDURAL RISKS | REQUIRED RESOURCES |
---|---|---|
Shunting procedures103–110 Instrument diameter: 6–9 French (1.83–3 mm) |
Maternal: Myometrial bleeding <1% | Maternal: L&D unit if viable; OB anesthesiology for iv conscious sedation or rarely neuraxial anesthesia |
Fetal: Shunt failure/dislodgement 8–35%; Chorio-amnion separation up to 7.7%; PPROM up to 10%; fetal death up to 12% |
Fetal: Trained intervention team, medications for fetal administration as required. | |
Neonatal: Premature delivery (<34 weeks up to 56%); NICU admission up to 83%; neonatal death up to 22% | Neonatal: NICU if viable with sub-specialty access as dictated by the fetal disease per se. | |
Bipolar or fetoscopic cord coagulation76, 95, 96, 97 Instrument diameter: 1.5–5 mm |
Maternal: Trocar site bleeding 1–3% | Maternal: Dedicated intervention setting, L&D unit; OB anesthesiology for IV conscious sedation or neuraxial anesthesia as required |
Fetal: Co-twin demise 8–14%; PPROM < 32 wks 23–34%; Chorio-amnion separation 5–10% | Fetal: Trained intervention team with specific procedural expertise at the expected level of complexity | |
Neonatal: Premature delivery (< 32 weeks 23–34%); neonatal death 6–12% | Neonatal: NICU if viable with subspecialty access if more severe fetal disease is present | |
Fetoscopic laser surgery18,22, 76, 74, 134, 132 Instrument diameter: 5–12 French (1.5–4 mm) |
Maternal: pulmonary edema 1–8%; ICU admission 1–2%; trocar site bleeding 5–7%; maternal blood transfusion up to 2.9%; intra-abdominal fluid leakage 1–7% | Maternal: Dedicated intervention setting, L&D unit, OB anesthesiology for IV conscious sedation or neuraxial anesthesia as required, Blood bank, ICU availability |
Fetal: PPROM <24 hrs. 3–4%; Chorioamnion separation 5–10%; placental abruption 1–3%; PPROM < 32 wks 19–34%; | Fetal: Trained intervention team with specific procedural expertise at the expected level of complexity | |
Neonatal: Preterm birth < 33 weeks up to 36% | Neonatal: NICU if viable, access to pediatric cardiology access with severe fetal disease | |
Fetoscopic endotracheal occlusion (FETO)76, 114, 120, 121, 132 Instrument diameter: 10 French (3.3 mm) |
Maternal: abdominal hemorrhage 0.5% | Maternal: Dedicated intervention setting, L&D unit, OB anesthesiology for iv. conscious sedation or neuraxial anesthesia as required, Blood bank, ICU availability |
Fetal: fetal death: 2%; unscheduled balloon removal up to 56%, unscheduled EXIT up to 7% | Fetal: Expertise with FETO procedure, On-call multidisciplinary team for emergent balloon removal or EXIT. | |
Neonatal: PTB < 34 weeks up to 31%; postnatal balloon removal up to 17% | Neonatal: NICU, PICU, Pediatric Surgery, Pediatric anesthesiology, Pediatric cardiology, ECMO, Pediatric ENT | |
Percutaneous fetoscopic MMC closure116–119, 130 Instrument diameter 10–15 French (3.3–5 mm), up to 4 ports. |
Maternal: Pulmonary edema 2%; abdominal CO2 leak 20–33% | Maternal: Dedicated intervention setting, L&D unit, OB anesthesiology for iv. conscious sedation, neuraxial or general anesthesia as required, Blood bank, Adult ICU |
Fetal: PPROM < 34 wks: 67% | Fetal: Fetal MFM surgeon, pediatric neurosurgery | |
Neonatal: PTB < 35 weeks up to 23%; CSF leakage at birth up to 32% |
Neonatal: NICU with subspecialty care, pediatric neurosurgery, pediatric anesthesiology |
Legend:, MFM= Maternal-Fetal Medicine, OB Anesthesiology = Obstetric Anesthesiology, NICU = neonatal intensive care unit, PTB = preterm birth, L&D = Labor & Delivery, LUTO = lower urinary tract obstruction, PICU = pediatric intensive care unit, PPROM = preterm premature rupture of membranes, EXIT = ex-utero intrapartum treatment, ECMO = extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.
Fetal interventions requiring laparotomy
Fetal interventions requiring a maternal laparotomy and hysterotomy (i.e., “open fetal surgery”) include open fetal myelomeningocele closure122, resection of fetal tumors such as a sacrococcygeal teratoma (SCT)123–126 and the EXIT procedure for airway obstruction127, 128. Although open fetoscopic fetal myelomeningocele closure avoids a hysterotomy, the maternal laparotomy itself carries comparable operative risks129, 130 (Table 3). Open procedures are performed under general anesthesia, aided by neuraxial anesthesia, for intrapartum and postpartum pain management, and require more sophisticated intra-operative maternal and fetal monitoring. The procedural set-up, as well as the requisite operator and multidisciplinary team expertise, is most demanding for these procedures and access to the highest-level of maternal (level III or IV) and neonatal care resources is required. Following a procedure, the mother and fetus need to be monitored in a L&D setting, with ready access to ICU resources if needed.
Table 3.
PROCEDURE | REPORTED PROCEDURAL RISKS | REQUIRED RESOURCES |
---|---|---|
Open fetoscopic MMC closure
119, 129, 130
(i.e. via laparotomy & fetoscopy) |
Maternal: Pulmonary edema up to 9% | Maternal: Dedicated intervention setting, L&D unit, OB anesthesiology for neuraxial or general anesthesia and post-operative pain management as required, Blood bank, Adult ICU |
Fetal: PPROM < 37 wks up to 25–38% | Fetal: Fetal MFM surgeon, Pediatric neurosurgery, pediatric surgery, pediatric anesthesiology | |
Neonatal: Premature delivery (< 35 weeks 45–52%); perinatal death 3–6%; dehiscence at repair site 4.3–13% | Neonatal: NICU with subspecialty care, Pediatric Neurosurgery | |
Open fetal MMC closure
71, 72, 73, 76
(i.e. via laparotomy & hysterotomy) Open fetal surgery 76, 119, 123, 126, |
Maternal: Pulmonary edema 2–6% (up to 27.8% for open fetal surgeries)144 Intra-operative blood transfusion 1–6% (fetal myelomeningocele repair), 9–13% for other open fetal surgery; ICU admission up to 24.6%,; intubation for > 48 hours up to 2.3% |
Maternal: Dedicated intervention setting, L&D unit, OB anesthesiology for neuraxial or general anesthesia and postoperative pain management as required, Blood bank, Adult ICU |
Fetal: Bradycardia requiring resuscitation 5–10%; PPROM < 37 wks: 32–46%; fetal death up to 4.3%144 | Fetal: Fetal MFM surgeon, pediatric neurosurgery, pediatric surgery, pediatric anesthesiology, fetal echocardiography, pediatric subspecialties | |
Neonatal: Premature delivery (< 35 weeks 45–52%); perinatal death 3–6%; dehiscence at repair site in current or future pregnancies 4.3–13% | Neonatal: NICU with subspecialty care, e.g., Pediatric Neurosurgery or other condition specific specialties. | |
Ex-utero intrapartum treatment (EXIT)
76, 127, 128 |
Maternal: intra-operative atony and hemorrhage |
Maternal: Dedicated intervention setting, L&D unit, OB anesthesiology for neuraxial or general anesthesia as required, Blood bank, Adult ICU |
Fetal: Perinatal death 3–14% usually attributable to primary pathology. | Fetal: Multidisciplinary intervention team | |
Neonatal: Premature delivery (average GA 31–36 wks). | Neonatal: NICU with subspecialty care |
Legend: PTB = preterm birth, ICU = intensive care unit, GA = gestational age, L&D = Labor & Delivery.
PROPOSED LEVELS OF CARE FOR FETAL THERAPY CENTERS
The care level of a fetal center is defined by the presence of resources tailored to the level of complexity of the intervention and ability to manage anticipated maternal, fetal and neonatal complications. Based on the complexity and risk profile of fetal interventions, three levels of fetal care are proposed.
LEVEL I
A level I fetal therapy center should be capable of offering fetal interventions that may be associated with the obstetric risks of PPROM and preterm birth, but which would be very unlikely to require maternal medical subspecialty or ICU care (Box 2). Neonatal risks should not exceed those of moderate prematurity (i.e. 32–37 weeks’ gestation)131 and a neonate should be unlikely to require any subspecialty medical or surgical care. Maternal care resources should meet ACOG/SMFM level III obstetrical care center standards and the NICU should be level III. Following a procedure, maternal and fetal monitoring should be supervised by the MFM team members of the fetal therapy center. In experienced hands needle based procedures and trans-placental medical therapy can be performed at a level I fetal therapy center (Box 2). After viability, interventions carrying a risk for fetal distress should be performed with ready access to a L&D unit and NICU. If any procedure is felt to be beyond the expertise of the local practitioners, or if the local supportive care resources are insufficient, referral to an institution where these can be met should be initiated, if feasible.
Box 2. Proposed Fetal Therapy Levels and Specific Resource Setting.
Level I |
Definition: Fetal therapies with low maternal and/or fetal risk |
Personnel: Fetal therapy center team, supported by institutional infrastructure |
Maternal care level: At least level III |
NICU care level: At least level III |
Examples of procedures: Fetal blood sampling, uncomplicated IUT ++, fetal shunt placement, radiofrequency or interstitial laser ablation, fetal antiarrhythmic treatment***. |
Additional consideration: Mechanism in place to evaluate case complexity prior to interventions and transfer care to a higher level fetal therapy center if required. |
Level II |
Definition: Fetal therapies with low or high maternal risk, but low neonatal risks |
Personnel: Fetal therapy center team supported by institutional infrastructure |
Maternal care level: At least level III |
NICU care level: At least level III |
Pediatric surgery care level: Level 1 for all conditions where a fetal intervention is offered |
Examples of procedures: All procedures performed at level I centers, with the addition of complicated IUTs++, fetoscopic laser ablation for TTTS, ultrasound guided cord or vascular occlusions, fetoscopic amniotic band resection, fetal cardiac interventions*, uncomplicated EXIT procedure** |
Level III |
Definition: All fetal therapies, irrespective of their risk level |
Personnel: Fetal therapy center team, supported by institutional infrastructure |
Maternal care level: At least level III |
NICU care level: Level IV |
Pediatric surgery: Level 1 for all conditions |
Examples of procedures: All procedures performed by level I and II centers irrespective of the level of fetal compromise or procedural challenge, plus FETO balloon placement and retrieval, complex multi-disciplinary fetoscopic procedures, open fetal surgery, 24/7 availability of EXIT |
Legend: TTTS= twin-twin transfusion syndrome, FETO= fetoscopic tracheal occlusion, EXIT= ex-utero intrapartum treatment, IUT = intrauterine transfusion
complicated IUTs refer to procedures < 20 weeks gestation, in the presence of a compromised or hydropic fetus or with a large maternal BMI
uncomplicated EXIT refers to procedures that can be scheduled electively, well in advance and where all required resources are available
only to be undertaken if the disease specific pediatric care services are present ideally at that institution or else by remote virtual consultation
maternal Digoxin, Sotalol, Flecainide or Amiodarone treatment should be undertaken with input from and neonatal follow-up with fetal/pediatric cardiology.
LEVEL II
A level II fetal therapy center should be capable of offering fetal interventions which also carry risks that might necessitate maternal ICU admission or could result in very preterm birth after viability (Table 4). While most level II fetal centers will be capable of managing the majority of maternal risks associated with any particular fetal intervention, the pediatric specialty resources to manage some of the more challenging neonatal issues may not be immediately available. Maternal care resources should comply with ACOG/SMFM level III or IV obstetrical care center standards, while a level III NICU is sufficient (Box 2). Level II fetal care centers should be capable of offering the full range of procedures performed at a level I center, but could also manage more complex ultrasound guided procedures and fetoscopies as well mothers with comorbid conditions or high BMI (Box 2). After viability, fetal therapy should only be offered for conditions for which the appropriate level of neonatal care is available. A level II center might, on a case by case basis, be capable of performing a prescheduled EXIT procedure, presuming on-site availability of the relevant pediatric airway expertise.
LEVEL III FETAL THERAPY CENTER
A level III fetal therapy center can offer the full range of minimally invasive and open fetal interventions and can manage all levels of maternal or neonatal risk or complications that might be encountered with such procedures (Box 2). These centers will have level III or IV maternal care services with ready access to a level IV NICU or PICU with the full range of pediatric subspecialties. A level IV maternal care center allows co-management or close collaboration between ICU and MFM subspecialists. A level III fetal center can offer the complete range of fetal therapy, including all therapies offered at level I and II centers, FETO for CDH and all open fetal surgical procedures. It can also manage fetal conditions, such as compromised CPAM, fetal hydrops, CDH and spina bifida. The center should also have the capability to rapidly assemble complex medical teams on a 24/7 basis (e.g., for EXIT)133.
SUMMARY
Development of a fetal therapy center is a multi-disciplinary endeavor guided by the principles of fetal therapy including the need to provide maternal safety and autonomy while also optimizing fetal neonatal and maternal outcomes. The fetal interventions offered should reflect the available expertise, resources and degree of institutional support. This document proposes three levels of care for fetal therapy centers. Our intention is to provide guidance for the optimal care setting in which fetal interventions can be offered. Multidisciplinary care is fundamental to the establishment and operation of a fetal therapy center. The proposed fetal levels of care are aligned with existing levels of care for maternal, neonatal and surgical care., In the absence of any central, national or international regulatory body at present, it is the responsibility of the leadership at each fetal therapy center to ensure appropriate staff credentialing, resource planning, quality benchmarking, and outcome reporting for any intervention offered at that institution. This document is intended as a guide for the optimal resources that ought to be in place to facilitate fetal therapy. It is not intended to impede the development of new fetal centers, but rather to assist them in considering the necessary components to ensure patient safety and procedural success. As the technology, instrumentation and procedures in fetal therapy evolve, different resources may be suggested. The overarching goal is continued advancement of fetal therapy through provision of safe and effective treatment of fetal disease.
Supplementary Material
Acknowledgements
The Board of the American Pediatric Surgical Association supports the development of a framework for the safe and ethical provision of care to fetuses and mothers. Organizations and their level of support of this document are listed in Appendix 1, available online at http://links.lww.com/xxx
The authors thank William Goodnight III M.D., University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, who acted as facilitator in planning discussions during the writing of this manuscript, and Nicole R Gavin, MD, Department of Gynecology & Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, who assisted in the writing of the manuscript.
Funding
The North American Fetal Therapy Network is supported through funding by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (5R131HD059293-05).
Footnotes
Financial Disclosure
Ahmet A. Baschat disclosed receiving royalties from UptoDate. James J. Cummings disclosed that he receives funding from ONY Biotech, Amherst, NY — first as a consultant, then later as a part-time employee. During the time this report was being prepared, he served as chair of a national committee (American Academy of Pediatrics, Fetus and Newborn). This was a voluntary, uncompensated position. Sarah J. Kilpatrick disclosed receiving funding from Contemporary OB/GYN, and Kaneka Corporation, and the textbook, Obstetrics – Normal and Problem Pregnancies. She also disclosed receiving royalties from UptoDate. Anita J. Moon-Grady is an unpaid board member for the Fetal Heart Society and a board member of the AIUM. She reported that this article discusses off-label use of approved intravascular devices, such as balloon catheters. The other authors did not report any potential conflicts of interest.
Each author has confirmed compliance with the journal’s requirements for authorship.
REFERENCES
- 1.Harrison MR, Filly RA, Golbus MS, Berkowitz RL, Callen PW, Canty TG, Catz C, Clewell WH, Depp R, Edwards MS, Fletcher JC, Frigoletto FD, Garrett WJ, Johnson ML, Jonsen A, De Lorimier AA, Liley WA, Mahoney MJ, Manning FD, Meier PR, Michejda M, Nakayama DK, Nelson L, Newkirk JB, Pringle K, Rodeck C, Rosen MA, Schulman JD. Fetal Treatment 1982, N Engl J Med 1982; 307: 1651–2; DOI 10.1056/NEJM198212233072623 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Moon-Grady AJ, Baschat A, Cass D, Choolani M, Copel JA, Crombleholme TM, Deprest J, Emery SP, Evans MI, Luks FI, Norton ME, Ryan G, Tsao K, Welch R, Harrison M. Fetal Treatment 2016: the Evolution of Fetal Therapy Centers. A joint statement from the International Fetal Medicine and Surgical Society and the North American Fetal Therapy Network. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2017; 42: 241–248; DOI 10.1159/000475929 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.https://naftnet.org/WhatisFetalTherapy/tabid/66/Default.aspx, accessed 2/7/2022
- 4.Johnson MP. The North American Fetal Therapy Network (NAFTNet): a new approach to collaborative research in fetal diagnosis and therapy. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2010; 15: 52–7; DOI 10.1610/j.siny.2009.05.06 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Shue EH, Hirose S. History and overview of Maternal-Fetal Surgery. In: Fetal Diagnosis – A reference handbook for Pediatric Surgeons. Eds: Feltis B, Muratore C, American Pediatric Surgical Association, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- 6.Cohen AR, Couto J, Cummings JJ, Johnson A, Joseph G, Kaufman BA, Litman RS, Menard MK, Moldenhauer JS, Pringle KC, Schwartz MZ, Walker WO Jr, Warf BC, Wax JR; MMC Maternal-Fetal Management Task Force. Position statement on fetal myelomeningocele repair. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 210: 107–11. DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2013.09.016 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG committee opinion no. 501. Maternal-fetal intervention and fetal care centers. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 118: 405–10, DOI 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31822c99af. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Levels of maternal care. Obstetric care consensus No.9. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol. 2019; 134: e41–55; DOI 10.1097/AOG.0000000000003383. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Task Force for Children’s Surgical Care. Optimal resources for children’s surgical care in the United States. J Am Coll Surg. 2014; 218: 479–87; DOI 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2013.10.028. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Policy statement: Levels of Neonatal Care. Pediatrics 2012; 130: 587–597; DOI 10.1542/peds.2012-1999 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Wakeam E, Hevelone ND, Maine R, Swain J, Lipsitz SA, Finlayson SR, Ashley SW, Weissman JS. Failure to rescue in safety-net hospitals: availability of hospital resources and differences in performance. JAMA Surg. 2014; 149: 229–35; DOI 10.1001/jamasurg.2013.3566. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Munson D The intersection of fetal palliative care and fetal surgery: Addressing mortality and quality of life. Semin Perinatol. 2017; 41: 101–05; DOI 10.1053/j.semperi.2016.11.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Marc-Aurele KL, Hull AD, Jones MC, Pretorius DH. A fetal diagnostic center’s referral rate for perinatal palliative care. Ann Palliat Med. 2018; 7: 177–185; DOI 10.21037/apm.2017.03.12 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Perinatal Palliative Care. ACOG committee opinion No 786. Obstet Gynecol 2019; 134: e84–9; DOI 10.1097/AOG.0000000000003425 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.ACOG Committee Opinion No. 352: Innovative practice: ethical guidelines. ACOG Committee on Ethics. Obstet Gynecol. 2006; 108: 1589–95; DOI 10.1097/00006250-200612000-00056 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Responsible Innovation in Children’s Surgical Care. Section on Surgery, Committee on Bioethics; American Pediatric Surgical association new technology committee. Pediatrics. 2017; 139; DOI 0.1542/peds.2016–3437 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Luks FI, Johnson A, Polzin WJ; North American Fetal Therapy Network. Innovation in maternal-fetal therapy: a position statement from the North American Fetal Therapy Network. Obstet Gynecol. 2015; 125: 649–52; DOI 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000689 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Peeters SH, Van Zwet EW, Oepkes D, Lopriore E, Klumper FJ, Middeldorp JM. Learning curve for fetoscopic laser surgery using cumulative sum analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2014; 93: 705–11; DOI 10.1111/aogs.12402 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Inglis SR, Lysikiewicz A, Sonnenblick AL, Streltzoff JL, Bussel JB, Chervenak FA. Advantages of larger volume, less frequent intrauterine red blood cell transfusions for maternal red cell alloimmunization. Am J Perinatol. 1996; 13: 27–33; DOI 10.1055/s-2007-994198 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Edwards AG, Teoh M, Hodges RJ, Palma-Dias R, Cole SA, Fung AM, Walker SP. Balancing Patient Access to Fetoscopic Laser Photocoagulation for Twin-to-Twin Transfusion Syndrome With Maintaining Procedural Competence: Are Collaborative Services Part of the Solution? Twin Res Hum Genet. 2016; 19: 276–84; DOI 10.1017/thg.2016.24 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Perry KG Jr, Hess LW, Roberts WE, Allbert JR, Floyd RC, McCaul JF, Martin RW, Martin JN Jr, Morrison JC. Cordocentesis (funipuncture) by maternal-fetal fellows: the learning curve. Fetal Diagn Ther. 1991; 6: 87–92; DOI 10.1159/000263629 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Chang YL, Chao AS, Chang SD, Hsieh PC, Wang CN. Short-term outcomes of fetoscopic laser surgery for severe twin-twin transfusion syndrome from Taiwan single center experience: demonstration of learning curve effect on the fetal outcomes. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2012; 51: 350–3; DOI 10.1016/j.tjog.2012.07.005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Júnior EA, Tonni G, Martins WP, Ruano R. Procedure-Related Complications and Survival Following Fetoscopic Endotracheal Occlusion (FETO) for Severe Congenital Diaphragmatic Hernia: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis in the FETO Era. Eur J Pediatr Surg. 2017; 27: 297–305; DOI 10.1055/s-0036-1587331. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Stadié R, Strizek B, Gottschalk I, Geipel A, Gembruch U, Berg C. Intrauterine vesicoamniotic shunting for fetal megacystis. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2016; 294: 1175–1182; DOI 10.1007/s00404-016-4152-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Moon-Grady AJ, Morris SA, Belfort M, Chmait R, Dangel J, Devlieger R, Emery S, Frommelt M, Galindo A, Gelehrter S, Gembruch U, Grinenco S, Habli M, Herberg U, Jaeggi E, Kilby M, Kontopoulos E, Marantz P, Miller O, Otaño L, Pedra C, Pedra S, Pruetz J, Quintero R, Ryan G, Sharland G, Simpson J, Vlastos E, Tworetzky W, Wilkins-Haug L, Oepkes D; International Fetal Cardiac Intervention Registry: A Worldwide Collaborative Description and Preliminary Outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015; 66: 388–99; DOI 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.05.037. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Joyeux L, De Bie F, Danzer E, Russo FM, Javaux A, Peralta CFA, De Salles AAF, Pastuszka A, Olejek A, Van Mieghem T, De Coppi P, Moldenhauer J, Whitehead WE, Belfort MA, Lapa DA, Acacio GL, Devlieger R, Hirose S, Farmer DL, Van Calenbergh F, Adzick NS, Johnson MP, Deprest J. Learning curves of open and endoscopic fetal spina bifida closure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2020; 55: 730–39; 10.1002/uog.20389. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Braun T, Brauer M, Fuchs I, Czernik C, Dudenhausen JW, Henrich W, Sarioglu N. Mirror syndrome: a systematic review of fetal associated conditions, maternal presentation and perinatal outcome. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2010; 27: 191–203; DOI 10.1159/000305096. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.O’Connor AM, Jacobsen MJ, Stacey D. An evidence-based approach to managing women’s decisional conflict. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2002; 31: 570–81; DOI 10.1111/j.1552-6909.2002.tb00083.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Informed consent and shared decision making in obstetrics & gynecology. ACOG committee opinion No 819. Obstet Gynecol 2021; 137: e34–41; DOI 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004247. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Chervenak FA, McCullough LB. An ethically justified framework for clinical investigation to benefit pregnant and fetal patients. Am J Bioeth 2011; 11: 39–49; 10.1080/15265161.2011.562595. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Wilpers A, Bahtiyar MO, Stitelman D, Batten J, Calix RX, Chase V, Yung N, Maassel N, Novick G. The parental journey of fetal care: a systematic review and metasynthesis. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2021; 3: 100320; DOI 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2021.100320. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Wilpers A, Bahtiyar MO, Wall D, Kobler K, Sadler LS, Dixon JK, Kennedy HP. Modified Delphi Study on Nursing Practice and Science in Fetal Care . J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2021; 50: 55–67; DOI 10.1016/j.jogn.2020.09.158. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Cole JCM, Moldenhauer JS, Jones TR, Shaughnessy EA, Zarrin HE, Coursey AL, Munson DA. A proposed model for Perinatal Palliative Care. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2017; 46: 904–911; DOI 10.1016/j.jogn.2017.01.014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Crombleholme TM, Coleman B, Hedrick H, Liechty K, Howell L, Flake AW, Johnson M, Adzick NS. Cystic adenomatoid malformation volume ratio predicts outcome in prenatally diagnosed cystic adenomatoid malformation of the lung. J Pediatr Surg. 2002; 37: 331–8; DOI 10.1053/jpsu.2002.30832. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Jani J, Nicolaides KH, Keller RL, Benachi A, Peralta CF, Favre R, Moreno O, Tibboel D, Lipitz S, Eggink A, Vaast P, Allegaert K, Harrison M, Deprest J; Antenatal-CDH-Registry Group. Observed to expected lung area to head circumference ratio in the prediction of survival in fetuses with isolated diaphragmatic hernia. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2007; 30: 67–71; DOI 10.1002/uog.4052. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Wieczorek A, Hernandez-Robles J, Ewing L, Leshko J, Luther S, Huhta J. Prediction of outcome of fetal congenital heart disease using a cardiovascular profile score. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2008; 31: 284–8; DOI 10.1002/uog.5177. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Huhta JC, Paul JJ. Doppler in fetal heart failure. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 53: 915–29; DOI 10.1097/GRF.0b013e3181fdffd9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Kim SA, Lee SM, Hong JS, Lee J, Park CW, Kim BJ, Park KH, Park JS, Jun JK. Ultrasonographic severity scoring of non-immune hydrops: a predictor of perinatal mortality. J Perinat Med. 2015; 43: 53–9; DOI 10.1515/jpm-2013-0208. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Quintero RA, Morales WJ, Allen MH, Bornick PW, Johnson PK, Kruger M. Staging of twin-twin transfusion syndrome. J Perinatol. 1999; 19: 550–5; DOI 10.1038/sj.jp.7200292. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Rychik J, Tian Z, Bebbington M, Xu F, McCann M, Mann S, Wilson RD, Johnson MP. The twin transfusion syndrome: spectrum of cardiovascular abnormality and development of a cardiovascular score to assess severity of disease. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007; 197: 392. e1–8; DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2007.06.055. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Shah AD, Border WL, Crombleholme TM, Michelfelder EC. Initial fetal cardiovascular profile score predicts recipient twin outcome in twin-twin transfusion syndrome. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2008; 21: 1105–8; DOI 10.1016/j.echo.2008.05.004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Abuhamad AZ, Benacerraf BR, Woletz P, Burke BL. The accreditation of ultrasound practices: impact on compliance with minimum performance guidelines. J Ultrasound Med 2004; 23:1023–1029; DOI 10.7863/jum.2004.23.8.1023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Snyder E, Baschat A, Huisman, Tekes. Value of Fetal MRI in the Era of Fetal Therapy for Management of Abnormalities Involving the Chest, Abdomen, or Pelvis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2018; 210: 998–1009; DOI 10.2214/AJR.17.18948. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Wapner RJ, Martin CL, Levy B, Ballif BC, Eng CM, Zachary JM, Savage M, Platt LD, Saltzman D, Grobman WA, Klugman S, Scholl T, Simpson JL, McCall K, Aggarwal VS, Bunke B, Nahum O, Patel A, Lamb AN, Thom EA, Beaudet AL, Ledbetter DH, Shaffer LG, Jackson L. Chromosomal microarray versus karyotyping for prenatal diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2012; 367: 2175–84; DOI 10.1056/NEJMoa1203382. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Drury S, Williams H, Trump N, Boustred C, Gene, Lench, Scott, Chitty. Exome sequencing for prenatal diagnosis of fetuses with sonographic abnormalities. Prenat Diagn. 2015; 35: 1010–7; DOI 10.1002/pd.4675. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Reddy UM, Baschat AA, Zlatnik MG, Towbin JA, Harman CR, Weiner CP. Detection of viral deoxyribonucleic acid in amniotic fluid: association with fetal malformation and pregnancy abnormalities. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2005; 20: 203–7; DOI 10.1159/000083906. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Adams LL, Gungor S, Turan S, Kopelman JN, Harman CR, Baschat AA. When are amniotic fluid viral PCR studies indicated in prenatal diagnosis? Prenat Diagn. 2012; 32: 88–93; DOI 10.1002/pd.3835. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Chervenak FA, McCullough LB. The Professional Responsibility Model of Perinatal Ethics. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- 49.Luks FI, Carr SR, Feit LR, Rubin LP. Experience with a multidisciplinary antenatal diagnosis and management model in fetal medicine. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2003; 14: 333–7; DOI 10.1080/jmf.14.5.333.337 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Chervenak FA, McCullough LB. An ethically justified, practical approach to offering, recommending, performing and referring for induced abortion and infanticide. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009; 201: 560.e1–6; DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2010.08.038. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Grayson AD, Moore RK, Jackson M, Rathore S, Sastry S, Gray TP, Schofield I, Chauhan A, Ordoubadi FF, Prendergast B, Stables; North West Quality Improvement Programme in Cardiac Interventions. Multivariate prediction of major adverse cardiac events after 9914 percutaneous coronary interventions in the north west of England. Heart 2006; 92: 658–63; DOI 10.1136/hrt.2005.066415. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Wright JD, Herzog TJ, Siddiq Z, Arend R, Neugut AI, Burke WM, Lewin SN, Ananth CV, Hershman DL. Failure to rescue as a source of variation in hospital mortality for ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30: 3976–82; COI 10.1200/JCO.2012.43.2906. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Sheetz KH, Dimick JB, Ghaferi AA. Impact of Hospital Characteristics on Failure to Rescue Following Major Surgery. Ann Surg. 2016; 263: 692–7; DOI 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001414. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54.Grushka JR, Laberge JM, Puligandla P, Skarsgard; Canadian Pediatric Surgery Network. Effect of hospital case volume on outcome in congenital diaphragmatic hernia: the experience of the Canadian Pediatric Surgery Network. J Pediatr Surg. 2009; 44: 873–6; DOI 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2009.01.023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55.Birkmeyer JD, Stukel TA, Siewers AE, Goodney PP, Wennberg DE, Lucas FL. Surgeon volume and operative mortality in the United States. New Engl J Med 2003; 349: 2117–27; DOI 10.1056/NEJMsa035205. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Huesch MD, Sakakibara M. Forgetting the learning curve for a moment: how much performance is unrelated to own experience? Health Econ 2009; 18: 855–62; DOI 10.1002/hec.1412. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Johnston M, Arora S, Anderson O, King D, Behar N, Darzi A. Escalation of care in surgery: a systematic risk assessment to prevent avoidable harm in hospitalized patients. Ann Surg. 2015; 261: 831–8; DOI 10.1097/SLA.0000000000000762. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.McAteer JP, LeRiviere CA, Drugad GT, Abdullah F, Oldham KT, Goldin AB. Influence of surgeon experience, hospital volume, and specialty designation on outcomes in pediatric surgery: a systematic review. JAMA Pediatr. 2013; 167 468–75; DOI 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.25. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59.Ahmed S, Luks FI, O’Brien BM, Muratore CS, Carr SR. Influence of experience, case load, and stage distribution on outcome of endoscopic laser surgery for TTTS--a review. Prenat Diagn. 2010; 30: 314–9; DOI 10.1002/pd.2454. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Morche J, Mathes T, Jacobs A, Pietsch B, Wessel L, Gruber S, Neugebauer EAM, Pieper D. Relationship between volume and outcome for surgery on congenital diaphragmatic hernia: A systematic review. J Pediatr Surg. 2020; 55: 2555–2565; DOI 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2020.03.025. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61.Lancet The. Fetal medicine: past, present, and future. Lancet 2019; 393: 717; DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30404-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62.Perry H, Duffy JMN, Reed K, Baschat A, Deprest J, Hecher K, Lewi L, Lopriore E, Oepkes D, Khalil; International Collaboration to Harmonise Outcomes for Twin-Twin Transfusion Syndrome (CHOOSE). A core outcome set for the evaluation of treatments for twin-twin transfusion syndrome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019; 54: 255–61; DOI 10.1002/uog.20388. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63.Khalil A, Duffy JMN, Perry H, Ganzevoort W, Reed K, Baschat AA, Deprest J, Gratacos E, Hecher K, Lewi L, Lopriore E, Oepkes D, Papageorghiou A, Gordijn; International Collaboration to Harmonise Outcomes for Selective Fetal Growth Restriction (CHOOSE-FGR). Study protocol: developing, disseminating, and implementing a core outcome set for selective fetal growth restriction in monochorionic twin pregnancies. Trials. 2019; 20: 35; DOI 10.1186/s13063-018-3153-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64.http://www.comet-initiative.org/, accessed 2/7/2022
- 65.Miller JL, Ahn ES, Garcia JR, Miller GT, Satin AJ, Baschat AA. Ultrasound-based three-dimensional printed medical model for multispecialty team surgical rehearsal prior to fetoscopic myelomeningocele repair. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018; 51: 836–837; DOI 10.1002/uog.18891. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66.Belfort MA, Whitehead WE, Bednov A, Shamshirsaz AA. Low-Fidelity Simulator for the Standardized Training of Fetoscopic Meningomyelocele Repair. Obstet Gynecol 2018; 131: 125–129; DOI 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002406. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67.Windrim R, Ryan G, Lebouthillier F, Campisi P, Kelly EN, Baud D, Yoo SJ, Deprest J. Development and use of a high-fidelity simulator for fetal endotracheal balloon occlusion (FETO) insertion and removal. Prenat Diagn 2014; 34: 180–4; DOI 10.1002/pd.4284. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68.Merz W, Tchatcheva K, Gembruch U, Kohl T. Maternal complications of fetoscopic laser photocoagulation (FLP) for treatment of twin-twin transfusion syndrome (TTTS). J Perinat Med. 2010; 38: 439–43; DOI 10.1515/jpm.2010.061. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69.Yinon Y, Visser J, Kelly EN, Windrim R, Amsalem H, Seaward PG, Ryan G. Early intrauterine transfusion in severe red blood cell alloimmunization. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2010; 36: 601–6; DOI 10.1002/uog.7696. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70.Zwiers C, Lindenburg ITM, Klumper FJ, de Haas M, Oepkes D, Van Kamp IL. Complications of intrauterine intravascular blood transfusion: lessons learned after 1678 procedures. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017; 50: 180–186; DOI 10.1002/uog.17319. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71.Moldenhauer JS, Adzick NS. Fetal surgery for myelomeningocele: After the Management of Myelomeningocele Study (MOMS). Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2017; 22: 360–66; DOI 10.1016/j.siny.2017.08.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72.Moron AF, Barbosa MM, Milani H, Sarmento SG, Santana E, Suriano IC, Dastoli PA, Cavalheiro S. Perinatal outcomes after open fetal surgery for myelomeningocele repair: a retrospective cohort study. BJOG. 2018; 125:1 280–1286; DOI 10.1111/1471-0528.15312. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73.Johnson MP, Bennett KA, Rand L, Burrows PK, Thom EA, Howell LJ, Farrell JA, Dabrowiak ME, Brock JW 3rd, Farmer DL, Adzick; Management of Myelomeningocele Study Investigators. The Management of Myelomeningocele Study: obstetrical outcomes and risk factors for obstetrical complications following prenatal surgery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016; 215: 771e1–9; DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2016.07.052. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74.Papanna R, Block-Abraham D, Mann LK, Buhimschi IA, Bebbington M, Garcia E, Kahlek N, Harman C, Johnson A, Baschat A, Moise KJ Jr. Risk Factors Associated with Preterm Delivery after Fetoscopic Laser Surgery for Twin Transfusion Syndrome Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 43: 48–53; DOI 10.1002/uog.13206. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75.Practical Approaches to Risk Minimisation for Medicinal Products: Report of CIOMS Working Group IX; 2014 [Google Scholar]
- 76.Sacco A, Van der Veeken L, Bagshaw E, Ferguson C, Van Mieghem T, David AL, Deprest J. Maternal complications following open and fetoscopic fetal surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Prenat Diagn. 2019; 39: 251–268; DOI 10.1002/pd.5421. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 77.Hoegland MA, Chatterjee D. Anesthesia for fetal surgery. Paediatr Anesthesia 2017; 27: 346–57; DOI 10.1111/pan.13185. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 78.Ferschl M, Rollins MD (2019). Anesthesia for Fetal Surgery and Other Fetal Therapies, Chapter 63. In Eriksson, Gropper (Eds.), Miller’s Anesthesia: (9th Edition). Mosby Elsevier. [Google Scholar]
- 79.Hein HA. Evaluation of a rural perinatal care system. Pediatrics. 1980; 66: 540–6. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 80.Crenshaw C Jr, Payne P, Blackmon L, Bowen C, Gutberlet R. Prematurity and the obstetrician. A regional neonatal intensive care nursery is not enough. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1983; 147: 125–32. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 81.Donofrio MT, Moon-Grady AJ, Hornberger LK, Copel JA, Sklansky MS, Abuhamad A, Cuneo BF, Huhta JC, Jonas RA, Krishnan A, Lacey S, Lee W, Michelfelder EC Sr, Rempel GR, Silverman NH, Spray TL, Strasburger JF, Tworetzky W, Rychik; American Heart Association Adults With Congenital Heart Disease Joint Committee of the Council on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young and Council on Clinical Cardiology, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery and Anesthesia, and Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing . Diagnosis and treatment of fetal cardiac disease: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2014; 129: 2183–242; DOI 10.1161/01.cir.0000437597.44550.5d. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 82.Lasswell SM, Barfield WD, Rochat RW, Blackmon L. Perinatal regionalization for very low-birth-weight and very preterm infants: a meta-analysis. JAMA. 2010; 304: 992–1000; DOI 10.1001/jama.2010.1226. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 83.Goldin AB, Dasgupta R, Chen LE, Blakely ML, Islam S, Downard CD, Rangel SJ, St Peter SD, Calkins CM, Arca MJ, Barnhart DC, Saito JM, Oldham KT, Abdullah F. Optimizing resources for the surgical care of children: an American Pediatric Surgical Association Outcomes and Clinical Trials Committee consensus statement. J Pediatr Surg 2014; 49: 818–22; DOI 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2014.02.085. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 84.Donofrio MT, Skurow-Todd K, Berger JT, McCarter R, Fulgium A, Krishnan A, Sable CA. Risk-stratified postnatal care of newborns with congenital heart disease determined by fetal echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2015; 28: 1339–49; DOI 10.1016/j.echo.2015.07.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 85.Colvin J, Bower C, Dickinson JE, Sokol J. Outcomes of congenital diaphragmatic hernia: a population-based study in Western Australia. Pediatrics. 2005; 116: e356–63; DOI 10.1542/peds.2004-2845. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 86.Anagnostou K, Messenger L, Yates R, Kelsall W. Outcome of infants with prenatally diagnosed congenital heart disease delivered outside specialist paediatric cardiac centres. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2013; 98: F218–21; DOI 0.1136/archdischild-2011-300488. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 87.Neubert S, Trautmann K, Tanner B, Steiner E, Linke F, Bahlmann F. Sonographic prognostic factors in prenatal diagnosis of SCT. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2004; 19: 319–26; DOI 10.1159/000077959. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 88.Salazar JH, Goldstein SD, Yang J, Gause C, Swarup A, Hsiung GE, Rangel SJ, Goldin AB, Abdullah F. Regionalization of Pediatric Surgery: Trends Already Underway. Ann Surg. 2016; 263: 1062–6; DOI 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001666. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 89.Linhart Y, Bashiri A, Maymon E, Shoham-Vardi I, Furman B, Vardi H, Mazor M. Congenital anomalies are an independent risk factor for neonatal morbidity and perinatal mortality in preterm birth. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2000; 90: 43–9; DOI 10.1016/s0301-2115(99)00196-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 90.Nasr A, Langer; Canadian Paediatric Surgery Network. Influence of location of delivery on outcome in neonates with gastroschisis. J Pediatr Surg. 2012; 47: 2022–5; DOI 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2012.07.037. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 91.Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM). Berry, Stone, Norton, Johnson, Berghella. Fetal blood sampling. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013; 209: 170–80; DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2013.07.014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 92.Wilson RD, Gagnon A, Audibert F, Campagnolo C, Carroll; GENETICS COMMITTEE. SOGC. Prenatal Diagnosis Procedures and Techniques to Obtain a Diagnostic Fetal Specimen or Tissue: Maternal and Fetal Risks and Benefits. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2015; 37: 656–70; DOI 0.1016/S1701-2163(15)30205-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 93.Hansmann M, Gembruch U, Bald R, Manz M, Redel DA. Fetal tachyarrhythmias: transplacental and direct treatment of the fetus-a report of 60 cases. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1991; 1: 162–8; DOI 10.1046/j.1469-0705.1991.01030162.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 94.Jolly M, Taylor M, Rose G, Govender L, Fisk NM. Interstitial laser: a new surgical technique for twin reversed arterial perfusion sequence in early pregnancy. BJOG 2001, 108: 1098–1102; DOI 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2001.00250.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 95.Holmes A, Jauniaux E, Rodeck C. Monopolar thermocoagulation in acardiac twinning. BJOG 2001, 108: 1000–1002; DOI 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2001.00234.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 96.Hirose M, Murata A, Kita N, Aotani H, Takebayashi K, Noda Y. Successful intrauterine treatment with radiofrequency ablation in a case of acardiac twin pregnancy complicated with a hydropic pump twin. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2004, 23: 509–512; DOI 10.1002/uog.1011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 97.Prefumo F, Cabassa P, Frusca T. Preliminary experience with microwave ablation for selective feticide in monochorionic twin pregnancies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013, 41: 470–1; DOI 10.1002/uog.12286. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 98.Committee on Quality Management and Departmental Administration. Continuum of Depth of Sedation: Definition of General Anesthesia and Levels of Sedation/Analgesia. Last amended 10/23/19.
- 99.Rossi AC, D’Addario V. Umbilical cord occlusion for selective feticide in complicated monochorionic twins: a systematic review of literature. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009; 200: 123–9; DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2008.08.039. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 100.Gaerty K, Greer RM, Kumar S. Systematic review and metaanalysis of perinatal outcomes after radiofrequency ablation and bipolar cord occlusion in monochorionic pregnancies. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2015; 213: 637–43; DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2015.04.035. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 101.Shinar S, Agrawal S, El-Chaâr D, Abbasi N, Beecroft R, Kachura J, Keunen J, Seaward G, Van Mieghem T, Windrim R, Ryan G. Selective fetal reduction in complicated monochorionic twin pregnancies: A comparison of techniques. Prenat Diagn. 2021; 41: 52–60; DOI 10.1002/pd.5830. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 102.Rodeck CH, Fisk NM, Fraser DI Nicolini U. Long-term in utero drainage of fetal hydrothorax. New Engl J Med 1988; 319: 1135–1138; DOI 10.1056/NEJM198810273191706. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 103.Morris RK, Malin GL, Quinlan-Jones E, Middleton LJ, Diwakar L, Hemming K, Burke D, Daniels J, Denny E, Barton P, Roberts TE, Khan KS, Deeks JJ, Kilby MD. The Percutaneous shunting in Lower Urinary Tract Obstruction (PLUTO) study and randomised controlled trial: evaluation of the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and acceptability of percutaneous vesicoamniotic shunting for lower urinary tract obstruction. Health Technol Assess. 2013; 17: 1–232; DOI 10.3310/hta17590. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 104.Abbasi N, Ryan G. Fetal primary pleural effusions: Prenatal diagnosis and management. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2019; 58: 66–77; DOI 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2019.01.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 105.Mallmann MR, Graham V, Rösing B, Gottschalk I, Müller A, Gembruch U, Geipel A, Berg C. Thoracoamniotic Shunting for Fetal Hydrothorax: Predictors of Intrauterine Course and Postnatal Outcome. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2017; 41: 58–65; DOI 10.1159/000446110. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 106.Peranteau WH, Adzick NS, Boelig MM, Flake AW, Hedrick HL, Howell LJ, Moldenhauer JS, Khalek N, Martinez-Poyer J, Johnson MP. Thoracoamniotic shunts for the management of fetal lung lesions and pleural effusions: a single-institution review and predictors of survival in 75 cases. J Pediatr Surg. 2015; 50: 301–5; DOI 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2014.11.019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 107.Jeong BD, Won HS, Lee MY, Shim JY, Lee PR, Kim A. Perinatal outcomes of fetal pleural effusion following thoracoamniotic shunting. Prenat Diagn. 2015; 35: 1365–70; DOI 10.1002/pd.4709. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 108.Schrey S, Kelly EN, Langer JC, Davies GA, Windrim R, Seaward PG, Ryan G. Fetal thoracoamniotic shunting for large macrocystic congenital cystic adenomatoid malformations of the lung. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2012; 39: 515–20; DOI 10.1002/uog.11084. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 109.Kelly EN, Seaward G, Ye XY, Windrim R, Van Mieghem T, Keunen J, Abbasi N, Chitayat D, Ryan G. Short and long-term outcome following thoracoamniotic shunting for fetal hydrothorax. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. Feb. 2021; 57: 624–30; DOI 10.1002/uog.21994. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 110.Abbasi N, Windrim R, Keunen J, Seaward PGR, Van Mieghem T, Kelly EN, Langer JC, Ryan G. Perinatal Outcome in Fetuses with Dislodged Thoraco-Amniotic Shunts. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2021; 48: 430–439. doi: 10.1159/000515694. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 111.King JR, Conturie CL, Ouzounian JG, Korst LM, Llanes A, Chmait RH. Umbilical Cord Occlusion via Laser Coagulation in Monochorionic Multifetal Gestations before and after 20 Weeks of Gestation. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2017; 42: 9–16; DOI 10.1159/000448948. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 112.Senat MV, Deprest J, Boulvain M, Paupe A, Winer N, Ville Y. Endoscopic laser surgery versus serial amnioreduction for severe twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2004; 351: 136–44; DOI 10.1056/NEJMoa032597. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 113.Tollenaar LSA, Slaghekke F, Lewi L, Ville Y, Lanna M, Weingertner A, Ryan G, Arévalo S, Khalil A, Brock CO, Klaritsch P, Hecher K, Gardener G, Bevilacqua E, Kostyukov KV, Bahtiyar MO, Kilby MD, Tiblad E, Oepkes D, Lopriore; Collaborators. Treatment and outcome of 370 cases with spontaneous or post-laser twin anemia-polycythemia sequence managed in 17 fetal therapy centers. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2020; 56: 378–387; DOI 10.1002/uog.22042. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 114.Jani JC, Nicolaides KH, Gratacós E, Valencia CM, Doné E, Martinez JM, Gucciardo L, Cruz R, Deprest JA. Severe diaphragmatic hernia treated by fetal endoscopic tracheal occlusion. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009; 34: 304–10; DOI 10.1002/uog.6450. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 115.Quintero RA, Morales WJ, Phillips J, Kalter CS, Angel JL. In utero lysis of amniotic bands. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1997; 10: 316–20; DOI 10.1046/j.1469-0705.1997.10050316.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 116.Pedreira DA, Zanon N, Nishikuni K, Moreira de Sá RA, Acacio GL, Chmait RH, Kontopoulos EV, Quintero RA. Endoscopic surgery for the antenatal treatment of myelomeningocele: the CECAM trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016; 214: 111.e1–111.e11; DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2015.09.065. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 117.Kohl T Percutaneous minimally invasive fetoscopic surgery for spina bifida aperta. Part I: surgical technique and perioperative outcome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014; 44: 515–24; DOI 10.1002/uog.13430. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 118.Degenhardt J, Schürg, Winarno, Oehmke, Khaleeva, Kawecki, Enzensberger, Tinneberg, Faas, Erhardt, Axt-Fliedner, Kohl.. Percutaneous minimal-access fetoscopic surgery for spina bifida aperta. Part II: maternal management and outcome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014; 44: 525–31. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 119.Sanz Cortes M, Chmait RH, Lapa DA, Belfort MA, Carreras E, Miller JL, Brawura Biskupski Samaha R, Sepulveda Gonzalez G, Gielchinsky Y, Yamamoto M, Persico N, Santorum M, Otaño L, Nicolaou E, Yinon Y, Faig-Leite F, Brandt R, Whitehead W, Maiz N, Baschat A, Kosinski P, Nieto-Sanjuanero A, Chu J, Kershenovich A, Nicolaides KH. Experience of 300 cases of prenatal fetoscopic open spina bifida repair: report of the International Fetoscopic Neural Tube Defect Repair Consortium. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021; 225: 678.e1–678.e11. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2021.05.044. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 120.Baschat AA, Rosner M, Millard SE, Murphy JD, Blakemore KJ, Keiser AM, Kearney J, Bullard J, Nogee LM, Bembea M, Jelin EB, Miller JL. Single-Center Outcome of Fetoscopic Tracheal Balloon Occlusion for Severe Congenital Diaphragmatic Hernia. Obstet Gynecol. 2020; 135: 511–521; DOI 10.1097/AOG.0000000000003692 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 121.Deprest JA, Nicolaides KH, Benachi A, Gratacos E, Ryan G, Persico N, Sago H, Johnson A, Wielgoś M, Berg C, Van Calster B, Russo; TOTAL Trial for Severe Hypoplasia Investigators. Randomized trial of fetal surgery for severe left congenital diaphragmatic hernia. N Engl J Med. 2021; 385: 107–118; DOI 10.1056/NEJMoa2027030. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 122.Adzick NS, Thom EA, Spong CY, Brock JW 3rd, Burrows PK, Johnson MP, Howell LJ, Farrell JA, Dabrowiak ME, Sutton LN, Gupta N, Tulipan NB, D’Alton ME, Farmer; MOMS Investigators. A randomized trial of prenatal versus postnatal repair of myelomeningocele. N Engl J Med. 2011; 364: 993–1004; DOI 10.1056/NEJMoa1014379 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 123.Langer JC, Harrison MR, Schmidt KG, Silverman NH, Anderson RL, Goldberg JD, Filly RA, Crombleholme TM, Longaker MT, Golbus MS. Fetal hydrops and death from sacrococcygeal teratoma: rationale for fetal surgery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1989; 160:1145–50; DOI 10.1016/0002-9378(89)90177-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 124.Adzick NS, Harrison MR, Flake AW, Howell LJ, Golbus MS, Filly RA. Fetal surgery for cystic adenomatoid malformation of the lung. J Pediatr Surg 1993; 28:806–12; DOI 10.1016/0022-3468(93)90332-f [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 125.Rychik J, Khalek N, Gaynor JW, Johnson MP, Adzick NS, Flake AW, Hedrick HL. Fetal intrapericardial teratoma: natural history and management including successful in utero surgery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2016; 215: 780e1–7; DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2016.08.010 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 126.Wilson RD, Hedrick H, Flake AW, Johnson MP, Bebbington MW, Mann S, Rychik J, Liechty K, Adzick NS. Sacrococcygeal teratomas: prenatal surveillance, growth and pregnancy outcome. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2009; 25: 15–20; DOI 10.1159/000188056 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 127.Liechty KW, Crombleholme TM, Flake AW, Morgan MA, Kurth CD, Hubbard AM, Adzick NS. Intrapartum airway management for giant fetal neck masses: the EXIT (ex utero intrapartum treatment) procedure. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997; 177: 870–4; DOI 10.1016/s0002-9378(97)70285-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 128.Moldenhauer JS. Ex Utero Intrapartum Therapy. Semin Pediatr Surg. 2013; 22: 44–9; DOI 10.1053/j.sempedsurg.2012.10.008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 129.Belfort MA, Whitehead WE, Shamshirsaz AA, Bateni ZH, Olutoye OO, Olutoye OA, Mann DG, Espinoza J, Williams E, Lee TC, Keswani SG, Ayres N, Cassady CI, Mehollin-Ray AR, Sanz Cortes M, Carreras E, Peiro JL, Ruano R, Cass DL. Fetoscopic Open Neural Tube Defect Repair: Development and Refinement of a Two-Port, Carbon Dioxide Insufflation Technique. Obstet Gynecol. 2017; 129: 734–743; DOI 10.1097/AOG.0000000000001941 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 130.Sanz Cortes M, Lapa DA, Acacio GL, Belfort M, Carreras E, Maiz N, Peiro JL, Lim FY, Miller J, Baschat A, Sepulveda G, Davila I, Gielchinsky Y, Benifla M, Stirnemann J, Ville Y, Yamamoto M, Figueroa H, Simpson L, Nicolaides KH. Proceedings of the First Annual Meeting of the International Fetoscopic Myelomeningocele Repair Consortium. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019; 53: 855–863. doi: 10.1002/uog.20308. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 131.www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/preterm-birth, Accessed 2/7/2022
- 132.Jiménez JA, Eixarch E, DeKoninck P, Bennini, Devliger R, Peralta CF, Gratacos E, Deprest J. Balloon removal after fetoscopic endoluminal tracheal occlusion for congenital diaphragmatic hernia. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2017;217:78.e1–11; DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.02.041 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 133.Hecher K, Diehl W, Zikulnig L, Vetter M, Hackeloer BJ: Endoscopic laser coagulation of placental anastomoses in 200 pregnancies with severe mid-trimester twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2000; 92:135–139; DOI 10.1016/s0301-2115(00)00437-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 134.Rustico MA, Lanna MM, Faiola S, Schena V, Dell’avanzo M, Mantegazza V, Parazzini C, Lista G, Scelsa B, Consonni D, Ferrazzi E. Fetal and maternal complications after selective fetoscopic laser surgery for twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome: a single-center experience. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2012; 31: 170–8; DOI 10.1159/000336227. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.