Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T04:25:33.570Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Section 9 - Diagnostic and therapeutic invasive procedures

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 April 2016

Edited by
Bidyut Kumar  and
Zarko Alfirevic
Bidyut Kumar
Affiliation:
Wrexham Maelor Hospital
Zarko Alfirevic
Affiliation:
University of Liverpool
Get access
Type
Chapter
Information
Fetal Medicine , pp. 337 - 366
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG). Advanced Training Skills Module – Fetal Medicine, 2010. http://www.rcog.org.uk/files/rcog-corp/ED-ATSM-Fetal-Med.pdf (accessed January 30, 2014).Google Scholar
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG). Amniocentesis. Green-Top Guideline No. 8. London: RCOG Press, 2005.Google Scholar
Firth, HV, Boyd, PA, Chamberlain, P, et al. Severe limb abnormalities after chorionic villus sampling at 56–66 days’ gestation. Lancet 1991; 337: 762–3.Google Scholar
Morris, RK, Quinlan-Jones, E, Kilby, MD, et al. Systematic review of accuracy of fetal urine analysis to predict poor postnatal renal function in cases of congenital urinary tract obstruction. Prenat Diagn 2007; 27: 900–11.Google Scholar
National Health Service Fetal Anomaly Screening Programme. Cut-off changes to Down’s Syndrome screening, 2008. http://fetalanomaly.screening.nhs.uk/programmestatements#fileid11755 (accessed January 30, 2014).Google Scholar
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG). Amniocentesis. Consent Advice 6. London: RCOG, 2006.Google Scholar
Mujezinovic, F, Alfirevic, Z. Procedure-related complications of amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol 2007; 110(30): 687–94.Google Scholar
Carlin, AJ, Alfirevic, Z. Techniques for chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis: a survey of practice in specialist UK centres. Prenat Diagn 2008; 28: 914–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG). Use of anti-D immunoglobulin for Rh prophylaxis. RCOG Green Top Guideline No. 22. London: RCOG Press, 2002.Google Scholar
Gordon, MC, Narula, K, O’Shaughnessy, R, et al. Complications of third-trimester amniocentesis using continuous ultrasound guidance. Obstet Gynecol 2002; 99: 255–9.Google Scholar
Cahill, AG, Macones, GA, Stamilio, DM, et al. Pregnancy loss rate after mid-trimester amniocentesis in twin pregnancies. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009; 200: 257.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yi, W, Pan, CQ, Hao, J, et al. Risk of vertical transmission of hepatitis B after amniocentesis in HBs antigen-positive mothers. J Hepatol 2014 60(3): 523–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maiques, V, Garcia-Tejedor, A, Perales, A, et al. HIV detection in amniotic fluid samples. Amniocentesis can be performed in HIV pregnant women? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2003; 108: 137–41.Google Scholar
Blessed, WB, Lacoste, H, Welch, RA. Obstetrician-gynecologists performing genetic amniocentesis may be misleading themselves and their patients. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001; 1784: 1340–2.Google Scholar

References

Liley, AW. Liquor amnil analysis in the management of the pregnancy complicated by resus sensitization. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1961; 82: 1359–70.Google Scholar
MacGregor, SN, Socol, M, Pielet, BW, et al. Prediction of haematocrit decline after intravascular transfusion. AJOG 1989; 161: 1491–3.Google Scholar
Jones, HM, Linch, D, Nicolaides, K, et al. Survival of transfused adult cells in the fetus. Fetal Ther 1986; 1: 193–5.Google Scholar
Somerset, DA, Moore, A, Whittle, MJ, et al. An audit of outcome in intravascular transfusions using the intrahepatic portion of the fetal umbilical vein compared to cordocentesis. Fetal Diagn Ther 2006; 21: 272–6.Google Scholar
Nicolini, U, Nicolaidis, P, Fisk, NM, et al. Fetal blood sampling from the intrahepatic vein: analysis of safety and clinical experience with 214 procedures. Obstet Gynecol 1990; 76: 47–53.Google Scholar
Van Kamp, IL, Klumper, F, Opekes, D, et al. Complications of intrauterine intravascular transfusion for fetal anemia due to maternal red cell alloimmunisation. AJOG 2005; 192: 171–7.Google Scholar
Schumacher, B, Moise, KJ Jr. Fetal transfusion for red blood cell alloimmunisation in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 1996; 88: 137–50.Google Scholar
Lindenburg, IT, Smits-Wintjens, V, van Klink, JM, et al., on behalf of the LOTUS study group. Long-term neurodevelopmental outcome after intrauterine transfusion for hemolytic disease of the fetus/newborn: the LOTUS study. AJOG 2012; 206: e1–8.Google Scholar
Knox, EM, Kilby, MD, Martin, WL, et al. In-utero pulmonary drainage in the management of primary hydrothorax and congenital cystic lung lesion: a systematic review. Ultrasound Obstet Gynaecol 2006; 28: 726–34.Google Scholar
Golbus, MS, Harrison, M, Filly, RA, et al. In utero treatment of urinary tract obstruction. American J Obstet Gynecol 1982; 142: 383–8.Google Scholar
Morris, RK, Main, G, Khan, KS, et al. Systematic review of the effectiveness of antenatal intervention for the treatment of congenital lower urinary tract obstruction. BJOG 2010; 117: 382–90.Google Scholar
Morris, RK Malin, GL, Quinlan-Jones, E, et al. Percutaneous vesicoamniotic shunting versus conservative management for fetal lower urinary tract obstruction (PLUTO): a randomised trial. Lancet 2013; 382: 1496–506.Google Scholar
Biard, J-M, Johnson, MP, Carr, MC, et al. Long-term outcomes in children treated by prenatal vesicoamniotic shunting for lower urinary tract obstruction. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 106(3): 503–8.Google Scholar
Denny, E, Quinlan-Jones, E, Bibila, S, et al. The experience of pregnant women with a diagnosis of fetal lower urinary tract obstruction (LUTO). Midwifery 2014; 30(6): 636–42.Google Scholar
Quintero, RA, Johnson, M, Romero, R, et al. In-utero percutaneous cystoscopy in the management of fetal lower obstructive uropathy. Lancet 1995; 346: 537–40.Google Scholar
Malin, G, Tonks, AM, Morris, RK, Gardosi, J, Kilby, MD. Congenital lower urinary tract obstruction: a population-based epidemiological study. BJOG, 2012 Nov; 119(12): 1455–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Urig, M, Clewell, W, Elliot, P. Twin-twin transfusion sydrome. AJOG 1990; 163: 1522–6.Google Scholar
Saunders, N, Snijders, R, Nicholaides, K. Theraputic amniocentesis in twin-twin transfusion syndrome appearing in the second trimester of pregnancy. AJOG 1991; 166: 820–4.Google Scholar
Saade, G, Olson, G, Belfort, M. Amniotomy: a new approach to the ‘stuck twin’ syndrome. AJOG 1995; 172: 429.Google Scholar
Saade, G, Belfort, M, Berry, D, et al. Amniotic septostomy for the treatment of twin oligohydramnios-polyhydramnios sequence. Fetal Diagn Ther 1998; 13: 86–93.Google Scholar
De Lia, JE, Cruikshank, DP, Keye, WR Jr. Fetoscopic neodymium: Yag laser occlusion of placental vessels insevere twin-twin transfusion syndrome. Obstet Gynecol 1990; 75: 1046–53.Google Scholar
Senat, MV, Deprest, J, Boulvain, M, et al. Endoscopic laser surgery versus serial amnioreduction for severe twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome. NEJM 2004; 315: 136–44.Google Scholar
Morris, RK, Selman, TJ, Harbidge, A, et al. Fetoscopic laser coagulation for severe twin to twin transfusion syndrome: factors influencing perinatal outcome, learning curve of the procedure and lessons for new centres. BJOG 2010; 117: 1350–7.Google Scholar
Quintero, RA. Twin-twin tansfusion syndrome. Clin Perinatol 2003; 30: 591–600.Google Scholar
Roberts, D, Neilson, JP, Kilby, MD, et al. Interventions for the treatment of twin-twin transfusion syndrome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014; 1: CD002073.Google Scholar
Ville Y, . Twin-twin transfusion syndrome: time to forget the Quintero staging system? Ultrasound Obstet Gynaecol 2007; 30: 924–7.Google Scholar
Odibo, A, Caughey, A, Grobman, W, et al. Selective laser photocoagulation versus serial amniodrainage for the treatment of twin-twin tansfusion syndrome: a cost effectiveness analysis. J Perinatol 2009; 29: 543–7.Google Scholar
Slaghekke, F, Lopriore, E, Lewi, L, et al. Fetoscopic laser coagulation of the vascular equator versus selective coagulation for twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome: an open-label randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2014; 383(9935): 2144–51.Google Scholar
Merz, W, Tchatcheva, K, Gembruch, U, et al. Maternal complications of fetoscopic laser photocoagulation (FLP) for treatment of twin-twin transfusion syndrome (TTTS). J Perinatal Med 2010; 38: 439–43.Google Scholar
Lewi, L, Jani, J, Cannie, M et al. Intertwin anastomoses in monochorionic placentas after fetoscopic laser coagulation for twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome: is there more than meets the eye? AJOG 2006; 194: 790–5.Google Scholar
Yamamoto, M, Murr, E, Robyr, R, et al. Incidence and Impact of perioperative complications in 175 fetoscopy guided laser coagulation of chorionic plate anastomoses in fetofetal transfusion syndrome before 26 weeks gestation. AJOG 2005; 193: 1110–6.Google Scholar
Deprest, JA, Audibert, F, Van Schoubroeck, D, et al. Bipolar coagulation of the umbilical cord in complicated monochroionic twin pregnancy. AJOG 2000; 182: 340–5.Google Scholar
Robyr, R, Yamamoto, M, Ville, Y. Selective feticide in complicated monochrorionic twin pregnancies using ultrasound-guided bipolar coagulation. BJOG 2005; 112(10): 1344–8.Google Scholar
Hecher, K, Lewl, L, Gratacos, E, et al. Twin reversed arterial perfusion: fetoscopic laser coagulation of placental anastomoses or the umbilical cord. Ultrasound Obstet Gynaecol 2006; 28: 688–91.Google Scholar
Tan, TY, Sepulveda, W. Acardiac twin: a systematic review of minimally invasive treatment modalities. Ultrasound Obstet Gynaecol 2003; 22: 409–19.Google ScholarPubMed
Cabassa, P, Fichera, A, Prefumo, F, et al. The use of radiofrequency in the treatment of twin reversed arterial perfusion sequence: a case series and review of the literature. Eur J Obstet Gynaecol Reprod Biol 2013; 166: 127–32.Google Scholar
Suda, K, Bigras, J, Bohn, D, et al. Echocardiographic predictors of outcome in newborns with congenital diaphragmatic hernia. Pediatrics 2000; 105(5): 1106–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jani, J, Cannie, M, Peralta, C, et al. Lung volumes in fetuses with congenital diaphragmatic hernia: comparison of 3D US and MR imaging assessments. Radiology 2007; 244: 575–82.Google Scholar
Deprest, J, Evrard, V, Van Ballaer, P, et al. Tracheoscopic endoluminal plugging using an inflatable device in the fetal lamb model. Eur J Obstet Gynaecol Reprod Biol 1998; 81: 165–9.Google Scholar
Flageole, H, Evrard, V, Piedboeuf, B, et al. The plug-unplug sequence: an important step to acheive type II pneumocyte maturation in the fetal lamb model. J Pediatr Surg 1998; 33: 299–303.Google Scholar
Deprest, J, Nicolaides, K, Done, E, et al. Technical aspects of fetal endoscopic tracheal occlusion for congenital diaphragmatic hernia. J Pediatr Surg 2011; 46: 22–32.Google Scholar
Ruano, R, Yoshisaki, CT, da Silva, MM, et al. A randomized controlled trial of fetal endoscopic tracheal occlusion versus postnatal management of severe isolated congenital diaphragmatic hernia. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecology 2012; 39: 20–7.Google Scholar
Bouchard, S, Davey, M, Rintoul, NE, et al. Correction of hindbrain herniation and anatomy of the vermis following in utero repair of myelomeningocele in sheep. J Pediatr Surg 2003; 38: 451–8.Google Scholar
Meuli, M, Meuli-Simmen, C, Hutchins, GM, et al. In utero surgery rescues neurological function at birth in sheep with spina bifida. Nat Med 1995; 1: 342–7.Google Scholar
Sutton, L, Adzick, N, Bilaniuk, L et al. Improvement in hindbrian herniation demonstrated by serial fetal magnetic resonance imaging following fetal surgery for myelomeningocele. JAMA 1999; 282: 1826–31.Google Scholar
Bruner, J, Tulipan, N, Paschall, R, et al. Fetal surgery for myelomeningocele and the incidence of shunt dependant hydrocephalus. JAMA 1999; 282: 1819–25.Google Scholar
Johnson, MP, Sutton, L, Rintoul, N, et al. Fetal myelomeningocele repair: short-term clinical outcomes. AJOG 2003; 189: 482–7.Google Scholar
Johnson, MP, Gerdes, M, Rintoul, N, et al. Maternal-fetal surgery for myelomeningocele: neurodevelopment outcomes at 2 years of age. AJOG 2006; 194: 1145–8.Google Scholar
Wilson, R, Lemerand, K, Johnson, M et al. Reproductive outcomes in subsequent pregnancies after a pregnancy complicated by open maternal-fetal surgery (1996–2007). AJOG 2010; 203: 209e1–6.Google Scholar
Adzick, NS, Thom, EA, Spong, CY, et al. A randomized trial of prenatal versus postnatal repair of myelomeningocele. NEJM 2011; 364: 993–1004.Google Scholar

References

Report of Joint Working Group, Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG), and Royal College of Pathologists. Fetal and Perinatal Pathology. London: RCOG, 2001.Google Scholar
Confidential Enquiry into Maternal and Child Health (CEMACH). Perinatal Mortality 2007. Dorchester UK: Dorset Press, 2009.Google Scholar
Burton, JL, Underwood, J. Clinical, educational, and epidemiological value of autopsy. Lancet 2007; 369: 1471–80.Google Scholar
Shojania, KG, Burton, EC, McDonald, KM, et al. Changes in rates of autopsy-detected diagnostic errors over time: a systematic review. JAMA 2003; 289: 2849–56.Google Scholar
Roulson, J, Benbow, EW, Hasleton, PS. Discrepancies between clinical and autopsy diagnosis and the value of postmortem histology; a meta-analysis and review. Histopathology 2005; 47: 551–9.Google Scholar
Gordijn, SJ, Erwich, JJHM, Khong, TY. Value of the perinatal autopsy: critique. Pediatr Dev Pathol 2002; 5: 480–8.Google Scholar
Griffiths, PD, Variend, D, Evans, M, et al. Postmortem MR imaging of the fetal and stillborn central nervous system AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2003; 24(1): 22–7.Google Scholar
Wigglesworth, JS, Singer, DB. Textbook of Fetal and Perinatal Pathology, 2nd edn. Malden: Blackwell Science, 1998.Google Scholar
Gardosi, J, Kady, SM, McGeown, P, et al. Classification of stillbirth by relevant condition at death (ReCoDe): population based cohort study. BMJ 2005; 331(7525): 1113–7.Google Scholar
Gordijn, SJ, Erwich, JJ, Khong, TY. The perinatal autopsy: pertinent issues in multicultural Western Europe. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2007; 132: 3–7.Google Scholar
McHaffie, HE. Crucial Decisions at the Beginning of Life. Parents’ experiences of treatment withdrawals from infants. Abingdon: Radcliffe Medical Press Ltd, 2001.Google Scholar
Rahman, HA, Khong, TY. Survey of women’s reactions to perinatal necropsy. BMJ 1995; 310: 870–1.Google Scholar
McDermott, M. The continuing decline of autopsies in clinical trials: is there any way back? Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2004; 89: F198–F199.Google Scholar
UK Legislation. Human Tissue Act 2004 (http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts2004/ukpga_20040030_en_1).Google Scholar
Cox, P, Marton, T. Pathological assessment of intrauterine growth restriction. BestPract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2009; 23: 751–64.Google Scholar
Cohen, MC, Blakey, S, Donn, T, et al. An audit of parents’/guardians’ wishes recorded after coronial autopsies in cases of sudden unexpected death in infancy: issues raised and future directions. MedSci Law 2009; 49: 179–84.Google Scholar
Royal College of Pathologists (RCPATH). Service specification for paediatric and perinatal histopathology. London: RCPATH, 1995. http://www.rcpath.org/publications-media/publications/service-specification-for-paediatric-and-perinatal-histopathologyGoogle Scholar
Fox, H, Sebire, NJ. Pathology of the Placenta, 3rd edn. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier, 2007.Google Scholar
Heazell, AE, Martindale, EA. Can post-mortem examination of the placenta help determine the cause of stillbirth? J Obstet Gynaecol 2009; 29(3): 225–8.Google Scholar
Thayyil, S, Sebire, NJ, Chitty, LS, et al; MARIAS collaborative group. Post-mortem MRI versus conventional autopsy in fetuses and children: a prospective validation study. Lancet 2013; 382(9888): 223–33.Google Scholar
Sebire, NJ, Weber, MA, Thayyil, S, et al. Minimally invasive perinatal autopsies using magnetic resonance imaging and endoscopic postmortem examination (“keyhole autopsy”): feasibility and initial experience. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2012; 25(5): 513–8.Google Scholar
Cannie, M, Votino, C, Moerman, P, et al. Acceptance, reliability and confidence of diagnosis of fetal and neonatal virtuopsy compared with conventional autopsy: a prospective study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2012; 39(6): 659–65.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×