Prenatal diagnosis · 2018
Comparison of umbilical cord occlusion methods: Radiofrequency ablation versus laser photocoagulation.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Abdel-Sattar Mira, Chon Andrew H, Llanes Arlyn, Korst Lisa M, Ouzounian Joseph G, Chmait Ramen H
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes between 2 umbilical cord occlusion (UCO) methods: radiofrequency ablation (RFA) versus fetoscopic-guided laser photocoagulation.
METHODS: Retrospective study of all monochorionic diamniotic multiple gestations that underwent UCO with RFA (preferred after 2014) or laser (preferred before 2014). In bivariate analysis, patients treated with RFA were compared with laser. Risk factors for intrauterine fetal demise (IUFD) and 30-day survival of the co-twin were identified, and multiple logistic models were fitted to examine whether the UCO method was associated with these outcomes.
RESULTS: Of 60 UCO cases, 18 (30%) underwent RFA and 42 (70%) underwent laser surgery. The RFA method was associated with co-twin IUFD after surgery (6/18 [33.3%] vs 1/42 [2.4%], P = 0.0021). In logistic regression models, patients who underwent RFA were more likely than patients who underwent laser to have an IUFD of the co-twin (OR 13.2, 1.23-142.62, P = 0.0331). These patients were also less likely to have 30-day survival of the co-twin, although this was not statistically significant (OR 0.20, 0.04-1.15, P = 0.0710).
CONCLUSION: Despite clear technical advantages of RFA compared with laser, we found that RFA appeared to be associated with increased risk of post-procedure fetal demise. Further studies should be conducted to confirm these findings.
METHODS: Retrospective study of all monochorionic diamniotic multiple gestations that underwent UCO with RFA (preferred after 2014) or laser (preferred before 2014). In bivariate analysis, patients treated with RFA were compared with laser. Risk factors for intrauterine fetal demise (IUFD) and 30-day survival of the co-twin were identified, and multiple logistic models were fitted to examine whether the UCO method was associated with these outcomes.
RESULTS: Of 60 UCO cases, 18 (30%) underwent RFA and 42 (70%) underwent laser surgery. The RFA method was associated with co-twin IUFD after surgery (6/18 [33.3%] vs 1/42 [2.4%], P = 0.0021). In logistic regression models, patients who underwent RFA were more likely than patients who underwent laser to have an IUFD of the co-twin (OR 13.2, 1.23-142.62, P = 0.0331). These patients were also less likely to have 30-day survival of the co-twin, although this was not statistically significant (OR 0.20, 0.04-1.15, P = 0.0710).
CONCLUSION: Despite clear technical advantages of RFA compared with laser, we found that RFA appeared to be associated with increased risk of post-procedure fetal demise. Further studies should be conducted to confirm these findings.