Anales de pediatria · 2024
Neonates with a prenatal diagnosis of hydrops fetalis: A 10-year experience in a tertiary care center.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Morey-Olivé Miriam, Marín Córdoba Carlota, Camba Longueira Fátima, Rodó Rodríguez Carlota, Arévalo Martínez Silvia, Maíz Nerea, Montaner-Ramón Alicia
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Hydrops fetalis (HF) is a rare condition with a high mortality. This study analysed the obstetric and perinatal outcomes of antenatally diagnosed HF according to its aetiology and the possibility of intrauterine treatment (IUT).
PATIENTS AND METHODS: We carried out a retrospective review of the health records of 164 pregnant women with a prenatal diagnosis of HF in a tertiary care centre between 2011-2021. We analysed prenatal interventions, clinical findings, aetiologies and obstetric and live-born infant outcomes.
RESULTS: An invasive prenatal study had been performed in 79.3% cases. The most common aetiologies were genetic disorders (31%), TORCH and parvovirus B19 infections (9.7%) and structural heart diseases (9.1%). Intrauterine treatment was performed in 25.6%, and 74.4% of pregnancies were terminated. Pregnancies with a prenatal diagnosis of genetic or chromosomal disorders had higher rates of elective termination compared to other aetiologies (P < .01). Among all pregnancies, only 25.6% resulted in live births (LBs), most of them preterm. Perinatal and 1-year survival rates were higher in the group that received IUT (P < .001). Among the LBs, structural heart diseases had the worst survival rates, while the aetiology with the best outcomes was tachyarrhythmia. Survival at 1 year of life among those born alive was 70%, but 58.6% of these infants had significant morbidity at discharge.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite advances in the management of FH, the poor obstetric prognosis, perinatal mortality and morbidity of survivors is still significant. These data are important for the purpose of counselling families when HF is diagnosed antenatally.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: We carried out a retrospective review of the health records of 164 pregnant women with a prenatal diagnosis of HF in a tertiary care centre between 2011-2021. We analysed prenatal interventions, clinical findings, aetiologies and obstetric and live-born infant outcomes.
RESULTS: An invasive prenatal study had been performed in 79.3% cases. The most common aetiologies were genetic disorders (31%), TORCH and parvovirus B19 infections (9.7%) and structural heart diseases (9.1%). Intrauterine treatment was performed in 25.6%, and 74.4% of pregnancies were terminated. Pregnancies with a prenatal diagnosis of genetic or chromosomal disorders had higher rates of elective termination compared to other aetiologies (P < .01). Among all pregnancies, only 25.6% resulted in live births (LBs), most of them preterm. Perinatal and 1-year survival rates were higher in the group that received IUT (P < .001). Among the LBs, structural heart diseases had the worst survival rates, while the aetiology with the best outcomes was tachyarrhythmia. Survival at 1 year of life among those born alive was 70%, but 58.6% of these infants had significant morbidity at discharge.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite advances in the management of FH, the poor obstetric prognosis, perinatal mortality and morbidity of survivors is still significant. These data are important for the purpose of counselling families when HF is diagnosed antenatally.