Startseite Multi-fetal pregnancy reduction (MFPR) to twins or singleton – medical justification and ethical slippery slope
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

Multi-fetal pregnancy reduction (MFPR) to twins or singleton – medical justification and ethical slippery slope

  • Arie Drugan EMAIL logo und Amir Weissman
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 24. Mai 2016

Abstract

Multi-fetal pregnancy reduction (MFPR) is an ethically acceptable procedure aimed to increase survival and well-being of the remaining fetuses from high-order multiple gestations. In most cases we offer the procedure to triplets or quadruplets and opt to preserve twins; lately, the option to maintain a single fetus was suggested. We examined the outcomes of 140 pregnancies that underwent MFPR in our center and were followed to delivery – 105 were reduced to twins and 35 to singletons. The rate of procedure-related pregnancy loss was identical (2.9%). Leaving only one fetus was associated with a higher gestational age at delivery (35.4±2.4 weeks vs. 37.7±2.1 weeks, P<0.0001), with heavier neonates (2222 g vs. 3017 g, P<0.0001) and with a reduction in the cesarean section (CS) rate (76% in twins vs. 51.4% in singletons, P=0.02). Six pregnancies reduced to twins (5.8%) ended before 32 weeks as compared to one pregnancy reduced to a singleton. We conclude that reduction of triplets to singletons is medically and ethically acceptable, after thorough counseling of patients. However, considering the pregnancy loss risk of MFPR and the relatively good outcome of twin gestations, reduction of twins to singletons is ethically acceptable only in extraordinary maternal or fetal conditions.


Corresponding author: Arie Drugan, MD, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Rambam Health Care Campus, POB 9106, Haifa, Israel

References

[1] Dickens BM, Cocks RJ. Multiple pregnancy: legal and ethical issues. In: Ethical and legal issues in reproductive health. Ireland: Elsevier Publ; 2008, p. 270–274.10.1016/j.ijgo.2008.08.006Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[2] Evans MI, Britt DW. Fetal reduction. Semin Perinatol. 2005; 29:321–9.10.1053/j.semperi.2005.10.004Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[3] Evans MI, Andriole S, Britt DW. Fetal reduction: 25 years’ experience. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2014;35:69–82.10.1159/000357974Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[4] Evans MI, Kaufman MI, Urban AJ, Britt DW, Fletcher JC. Fetal reduction from twins to singleton: a reasonable consideration? Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104:102–9.10.1097/01.AOG.0000128299.57908.90Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[5] Hasson J, Shapira A, Many A, Jaffa A, Har-Toov J. Reduction of twin pregnancy to singleton: does it improve pregnancy outcome? J Mat Fetal Neonatal Med. 2011;24:1362–6.10.3109/14767058.2010.547964Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[6] Haas J, Sasson AM, Barzilai E, Mazaki Tovi S, Orvieto R, Weisz B, et al. Perinatal outcome after fetal reduction from twin to singleton: to reduce or not to reduce? Fertil Steril. 2015;103:428–32.10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.10.027Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[7] Gupta S, Fox NS, Feinberg J, Klauser CK, Rebarber A. Outcomes in twin pregnancies reduced to singleton pregnancies compared with ongoing twin pregnancies. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;213:580.e1–5.10.1016/j.ajog.2015.06.018Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

  1. The authors stated that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this article.

Received: 2016-2-19
Accepted: 2016-4-19
Published Online: 2016-5-24
Published in Print: 2017-2-1

©2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Artikel in diesem Heft

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Editorial
  3. Fetal diagnosis and therapy: a continously evolving discipline
  4. Highlight articles
  5. Prenatally diagnosed fetal tumors of the head and neck: a systematic review with antenatal and postnatal outcomes over the past 20 years
  6. Prenatal screening for microcephaly: an update after three decades
  7. Fetal echocardiography: reference values for the Chinese population
  8. Multi-fetal pregnancy reduction (MFPR) to twins or singleton – medical justification and ethical slippery slope
  9. Combined screening test for trisomy 21 – is it as efficient as we believe?
  10. Fetal loss following invasive prenatal testing: a comparison of transabdominal chorionic villus sampling, transcervical chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis
  11. Comparison of adverse perinatal outcomes after single-needle and double-needle CVS techniques
  12. Prenatal decision-making in the second and third trimester in trisomy 21-affected pregnancies
  13. Role of collagen type IV in the pathogenesis of increased prenasal thickness in Down syndrome fetuses: sonographic and immunohistological findings
  14. Congenital diaphragmatic hernia: endotracheal fluid phospholipidic profile following tracheal occlusion in an experimental model
  15. Original articles
  16. The effect of intraumbilical fetal nutrition via a subcutaneously implanted port system on amino acid concentration by severe IUGR human fetuses
  17. Anti-inflammatory Elafin in human fetal membranes
  18. Recombinant vascular endothelial growth factor 121 injection for the prevention of fetal growth restriction in a preeclampsia mouse model
  19. Estimation of fetal weight by ultrasonography after preterm premature rupture of membranes: comparison of different formulas
  20. Congress Calendar
  21. Congress Calendar
Heruntergeladen am 22.9.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/jpm-2016-0058/html
Button zum nach oben scrollen