Prenatal diagnosis · 2026
Fetal Instability and Resuscitative Management During Fetal Intervention: A Retrospective, Descriptive Analysis of 245 Fetal Cardiac and Spina Bifida Procedures.
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.
Naus Claire A, Yilmaz Furtun Betul, Munoz Jessian L, Johnson Rebecca M, Altman Carolyn A, Belfort Michael A, Joyeux Luc, King Alice, Mann David G, Morris Shaine, Qureshi Athar M, Sanz Cortes Magdalena, Whitehead William E, Sutton Caitlin D
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The heterogeneity of fetal surgery has led to variability in the nature and frequency of fetal instability. Understanding these differences is critical for optimizing management.
METHODS: We reviewed all fetal atrial septal interventions (FASI) and fetoscopic myelomeningocele (fMMC) repairs with fetal instability performed at our institution between March 2012 and April 2025. We described and compared the frequency, timing, etiology, and management of fetal instability.
RESULTS: During the study period, 28 unique patients underwent 35 FASI procedures, and 210 patients underwent fMMC repair. Fetal instability occurred in 51 of 245 cases (20.8%), with rates varying significantly by procedure type (30/35 FASI, 85.7% vs. 21/210 fMMC, 10.0%, p < 0.01). The causes of fetal instability requiring resuscitation differed by procedure. In FASI, all instability was procedure-related, whereas instability during fMMC repairs was most often related to the uterine environment. Invasive resuscitative interventions (e.g., pericardiocentesis) were used exclusively in FASI. In fMMC repair, less invasive interventions (e.g., repositioning) were more commonly employed.
CONCLUSIONS: Fetal instability is common during fetal interventions, with higher rates and more invasive resuscitation during FASIs compared with fMMC repairs. The causes and interventions employed vary by procedure type, highlighting the need for tailored intraoperative strategies.
METHODS: We reviewed all fetal atrial septal interventions (FASI) and fetoscopic myelomeningocele (fMMC) repairs with fetal instability performed at our institution between March 2012 and April 2025. We described and compared the frequency, timing, etiology, and management of fetal instability.
RESULTS: During the study period, 28 unique patients underwent 35 FASI procedures, and 210 patients underwent fMMC repair. Fetal instability occurred in 51 of 245 cases (20.8%), with rates varying significantly by procedure type (30/35 FASI, 85.7% vs. 21/210 fMMC, 10.0%, p < 0.01). The causes of fetal instability requiring resuscitation differed by procedure. In FASI, all instability was procedure-related, whereas instability during fMMC repairs was most often related to the uterine environment. Invasive resuscitative interventions (e.g., pericardiocentesis) were used exclusively in FASI. In fMMC repair, less invasive interventions (e.g., repositioning) were more commonly employed.
CONCLUSIONS: Fetal instability is common during fetal interventions, with higher rates and more invasive resuscitation during FASIs compared with fMMC repairs. The causes and interventions employed vary by procedure type, highlighting the need for tailored intraoperative strategies.