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-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T16:39:35.109Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 6 - Risks and Complications of Multiple Gestation

from Section 2 - Pregnancy, Labor, and Delivery Complications Causing Brain Injury

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 December 2017

By
Yair Blumenfeld  and
Samantha Do
Edited by
David K. Stevenson ,
William E. Benitz ,
Philip Sunshine ,
Susan R. Hintz  and
Maurice L. Druzin
David K. Stevenson
Affiliation:
Stanford University, California
William E. Benitz
Affiliation:
Stanford University, California
Philip Sunshine
Affiliation:
Stanford University, California
Susan R. Hintz
Affiliation:
Stanford University, California
Maurice L. Druzin
Affiliation:
Stanford University, California
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Fetal and Neonatal Brain Injury , pp. 80 - 88
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2017

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

Martin, JA, Hamilton, BE, Osterman, MJ, et al. Births: final data for 2013. National Vital Statistics Reports: From the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics System 2015; 64(1): 1–65.Google Scholar
March of Dimes. Peri Stats, 2008. Available at www.marchofdimes.com/peristats.Google Scholar
Alberman, ED. Cerebral palsy in twins. Guy’s Hosp Rep 1964; 113: 285–95.Google ScholarPubMed
Goodman, R. Cerebral palsy in twins. Dev Med Child Neurol 1993; 35(4): 370.Google Scholar
Livinec, F, Ancel, PY, Marret, S, et al. Prenatal risk factors for cerebral palsy in very preterm singletons and twins. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 105(6): 1341–7.Google Scholar
Petterson, B, Nelson, KB, Watson, L, Stanley, F. Twins, triplets, and cerebral palsy in births in Western Australia in the 1980s. BMJ 1993; 307(6914): 1239–43.Google Scholar
Pharoah, PO. Twins and cerebral palsy. Acta Paediatr 2001; 90(436): 6–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thorngren-Jerneck, K, Herbst, A. Perinatal factors associated with cerebral palsy in children born in Sweden. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 108(6): 1499–1505.Google Scholar
Cunningham, FG. Williams obstetrics, 24th edn. New York: McGraw-Hill Medical, 2014.Google Scholar
Sadler, TW. Langman’s Medical Embryology, 13th edn. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer, 2015.Google Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Multifetal gestations: twin, triplet, and higher-order multifetal pregnancies (ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 144). Obstet Gynecol 2014; 123(5): 1118–32.Google Scholar
Monteagudo, A, Timor-Tritsch, IE, Sharma, S. Early and simple determination of chorionic and amniotic type in multifetal gestations in the first fourteen weeks by high-frequency transvaginal ultrasonography. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994; 170(3): 824–9.Google Scholar
Scardo, JA, Ellings, JM, Newman, RB. Prospective determination of chorionicity, amnionicity, and zygosity in twin gestations. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 173(5): 1376–80.Google Scholar
Blumenfeld, YJ, Momirova, V, Rouse, DJ, et al. Accuracy of sonographic chorionicity classification in twin gestations. J Ultrasound Med 2014; 33(12): 2187–92.Google Scholar
Gardner, MO, Goldenberg, RL, Cliver, SP, et al. The origin and outcome of preterm twin pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol 1995; 85(4): 553–7.Google Scholar
Newman, RB, Iams, JD, Das, A, et al. A prospective masked observational study of uterine contraction frequency in twins. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006; 195(6): 1564–70.Google Scholar
Romero, R, Espinoza, J, Kusanovic, JP, et al. The preterm parturition syndrome. BJOG 2006; 113(Suppl. 3): 17–42.Google Scholar
Nassar, AH, Usta, IM, Rechdan, JB, et al. Pregnancy outcome in spontaneous twins versus twins who were conceived through in vitro fertilization. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 189(2): 513–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldenberg, RL, Iams, JD, Das, A, et al. The Preterm Prediction Study: sequential cervical length and fetal fibronectin testing for the prediction of spontaneous preterm birth. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 182(3): 636–43.Google Scholar
Lockwood, CJ, Senyei, AE, Dische, MR, et al. Fetal fibronectin in cervical and vaginal secretions as a predictor of preterm delivery. N Engl J Med 1991; 325(10): 669–74.Google Scholar
Gibson, JL, Macara, LM, Owen, P, et al. Prediction of preterm delivery in twin pregnancy: a prospective, observational study of cervical length and fetal fibronectin testing. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2004; 23(6): 561–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldenberg, RL, Iams, JD, Miodovnik, M, et al. The preterm prediction study: risk factors in twin gestations. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996; 175(4 Pt 1): 1047–53.Google Scholar
Ruiz, RJ, Fullerton, J, Brown, CE. The utility of fFN for the prediction of preterm birth in twin gestations. JOGNN 2004; 33(4): 446–54.Google Scholar
Fox, NS, Saltzman, DH, Klauser, CK, et al. Prediction of spontaneous preterm birth in asymptomatic twin pregnancies with the use of combined fetal fibronectin and cervical length. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009; 201(3):e313–15.Google ScholarPubMed
Berghella, V, Odibo, AO, To, MS, et al. Cerclage for short cervix on ultrasonography: meta-analysis of trials using individual patient-level data. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 106(1): 181–9.Google Scholar
Dor, J, Shalev, J, Mashiach, S, et al. Elective cervical suture of twin pregnancies diagnosed ultrasonically in the first trimester following induced ovulation. Gynecol Obstet Invest 1982; 13(1): 55–60.Google Scholar
MRC/RCOG Working Party on Cervical Cerclage. Interim report of the Medical Research Council/Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists multicentre randomized trial of cervical cerclage. BJOG 1988; 95(5): 437–45.Google Scholar
Eskandar, M, Shafiq, H, Almushait, MA, et al. Cervical cerclage for prevention of preterm birth in women with twin pregnancy. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2007; 99(2): 110–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roman, AS, Rebarber, A, Pereira, L, et al. The efficacy of sonographically indicated cerclage in multiple gestations. J Ultrasound Med 2005; 24(6): 763–8; quiz 770.Google Scholar
Newman, RB, Krombach, RS, Myers, MC, McGee, DL. Effect of cerclage on obstetrical outcome in twin gestations with a shortened cervical length. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186(4): 634–40.Google Scholar
Roman, A, Rochelson, B, Fox, NS, et al. Efficacy of ultrasound-indicated cerclage in twin pregnancies. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2015; 212(6): e781–6.Google Scholar
Meis, PJ, Klebanoff, M, Thom, E, et al. Prevention of recurrent preterm delivery by 17α-hydroxyprogesterone caproate. N Engl J Med 2003; 348(24): 2379–85.Google Scholar
Rouse, DJ, Caritis, SN, Peaceman, AM, et al. A trial of 17α-hydroxyprogesterone caproate to prevent prematurity in twins. N Engl J Med 2007; 357(5): 454–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fonseca, EB, Celik, E, Parra, M, et al. Fetal Medicine Foundation second trimester screening G: progesterone and the risk of preterm birth among women with a short cervix. N Engl J Med 2007; 357(5): 462–9.Google Scholar
Hassan, SS, Romero, R, Vidyadhari, D, et al. Vaginal progesterone reduces the rate of preterm birth in women with a sonographic short cervix: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011; 38(1): 18–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brubaker, SG, Pessel, C, Zork, N, et al. Vaginal progesterone in women with twin gestations complicated by short cervix: a retrospective cohort study. BJOG 2015; 122(5): 712–18.Google Scholar
Goya, M, Pratcorona, L, Merced, C, et al. Cervical pessary in pregnant women with a short cervix (PECEP): an open-label randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2012; 379(9828): 1800–6.Google Scholar
Hales, KA, Matthews, JP, Rayburn, WF, Atkinson, BD. Intravenous magnesium sulfate for premature labor: comparison between twin and singleton gestations. Am J Perinatol 1995; 12(1): 7–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O’Leary, JA. Prophylactic tocolysis of twins. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1986; 154(4): 904–5.Google Scholar
Lyell, DJ, Pullen, K, Campbell, L, et al. Magnesium sulfate compared with nifedipine for acute tocolysis of preterm labor: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2007; 110(1): 61–7.Google Scholar
Milki, AA, Jun, SH, Hinckley, MD, et al. Incidence of monozygotic twinning with blastocyst transfer compared to cleavage-stage transfer. Fertil Steril 2003; 79(3): 503–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moayeri, SE, Behr, B, Lathi, RB, et al. Risk of monozygotic twinning with blastocyst transfer decreases over time: an 8-year experience. Fertil Steril 2007; 87(5): 1028–32.Google Scholar
Adegbite, AL, Castille, S, Ward, S, Bajoria, R. Neuromorbidity in preterm twins in relation to chorionicity and discordant birth weight. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 190(1): 156–63.Google Scholar
Bejar, R, Vigliocco, G, Gramajo, H, et al. Antenatal origin of neurologic damage in newborn infants. II. Multiple gestations. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990; 162(5): 1230–6.Google Scholar
Bahtiyar, MO, Dulay, AT, Weeks, BP, et al. Prevalence of congenital heart defects in monochorionic/diamniotic twin gestations: a systematic literature review. J Ultrasound Med 2007; 26(11): 1491–8.Google Scholar
Pettit, KE, Merchant, M, Machin, GA, et al. Congenital heart defects in a large, unselected cohort of monochorionic twins. J Perinatol 2013; 33(6): 457–61.Google Scholar
Okumura, A, Hayakawa, F, Kato, T, et al. Brain malformation of the surviving twin of intrauterine co-twin demise. J Child Neurol 2007; 22(1): 85–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morokuma, S, Tsukimori, K, Anami, A, et al. Brain injury of the survivor diagnosed at 18 weeks of gestation after intrauterine demise of the co-twin: a case report. Fetal Diagn Ther 2008; 23(2): 146–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Righini, A, Salmona, S, Bianchini, E, et al. Prenatal magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of ischemic brain lesions in the survivors of monochorionic twin pregnancies: report of 3 cases. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2004; 28(1): 87–92.Google Scholar
Ezra, Y, Shveiky, D, Ophir, E, et al. Intensive management and early delivery reduce antenatal mortality in monoamniotic twin pregnancies. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2005; 84(5): 432–5.Google Scholar
Minakami, H, Sato, I. Reestimating date of delivery in multifetal pregnancies. JAMA 1996; 275(18): 1432–4.Google Scholar
Kahn, B, Lumey, LH, Zybert, PA, et al. Prospective risk of fetal death in singleton, twin, and triplet gestations: implications for practice. Obstet Gynecol 2003; 102(4): 685–92.Google Scholar
Hack, KE, Derks, JB, Elias, SG, et al. Increased perinatal mortality and morbidity in monochorionic versus dichorionic twin pregnancies: clinical implications of a large Dutch cohort study. BJOG 2008; 115(1): 58–67.Google Scholar
Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Simpson, LL. Twin-twin transfusion syndrome. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013; 208(1): 3–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bajoria, R, Wigglesworth, J, Fisk, NM. Angioarchitecture of monochorionic placentas in relation to the twin-twin transfusion syndrome. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 172(3): 856–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lutfi, S, Allen, VM, Fahey, J, et al. Twin-twin transfusion syndrome: a population-based study. Obstet Gynecol 2004; 104(6): 1289–97.Google Scholar
Quintero, RA, Morales, WJ, Allen, MH, et al. Staging of twin-twin transfusion syndrome. J Perinatol 1999; 19(8 Pt 1): 550–5.Google Scholar
Rychik, J, Tian, Z, Bebbington, M, et al. The twin-twin transfusion syndrome: spectrum of cardiovascular abnormality and development of a cardiovascular score to assess severity of disease. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007; 197(4): e391–8.Google Scholar
Chescheir, NC, Seeds, JW. Polyhydramnios and oligohydramnios in twin gestations. Obstet Gynecol 1988; 71(6 Pt 1): 882–4.Google Scholar
Luks, FI, Carr, SR, Plevyak, M, et al. Limited prognostic value of a staging system for twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome. Fetal Diagn Ther 2004; 19(3): 301–4.Google Scholar
Mari, G, Roberts, A, Detti, L, et al. Perinatal morbidity and mortality rates in severe twin-twin transfusion syndrome: results of the International Amnioreduction Registry. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001; 185(3): 708–15.Google Scholar
Senat, MV, Deprest, J, Boulvain, M, et al. Endoscopic laser surgery versus serial amnioreduction for severe twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome. N Engl J Med 2004; 351(2): 136–44.Google Scholar
Crombleholme, TM, Shera, D, Lee, H, et al. A prospective, randomized, multicenter trial of amnioreduction vs selective fetoscopic laser photocoagulation for the treatment of severe twin-twin transfusion syndrome. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007; 197(4): e391–9.Google Scholar
Ruano, R, Rodo, C, Peiro, JL, et al. Fetoscopic laser ablation of placental anastomoses in twin-twin transfusion syndrome using ‘Solomon technique’. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013; 42(4): 434–9.Google Scholar
Papanna, R, Block-Abraham, D, Mann, LK, et al. Risk factors associated with preterm delivery after fetoscopic laser ablation for twin-twin transfusion syndrome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014; 43(1): 48–53.Google Scholar
Degani, S, Leibovitz, Z, Shapiro, I, et al. Instability of Doppler cerebral blood flow in monochorionic twins. J Ultrasound Med 2006; 25(4): 449–54.Google Scholar
Lopriore, E, Nagel, HT, Vandenbussche, FP, Walther, FJ. Long-term neurodevelopmental outcome in twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 189(5): 1314–19.Google Scholar
Graef, C, Ellenrieder, B, Hecher, K, et al. Long-term neurodevelopmental outcome of 167 children after intrauterine laser treatment for severe twin-twin transfusion syndrome. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006; 194(2): 303–8.Google Scholar
Lopriore, E, Middeldorp, JM, Sueters, M, et al. Long-term neurodevelopmental outcome in twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome treated with fetoscopic laser surgery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007; 196(3): e231–4.Google Scholar
Lopriore, E, Ortibus, E, Acosta-Rojas, R, et al. Risk factors for neurodevelopment impairment in twin-twin transfusion syndrome treated with fetoscopic laser surgery. Obstet Gynecol 2009; 113(2 Pt 1): 361–6.Google Scholar
Masheer, S, Maheen, H, Munim, S. Perinatal outcome of twin pregnancies according to chorionicity: an observational study from tertiary care hospital. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2015; 28(1): 23–5.Google Scholar
Amaru, RC, Bush, MC, Berkowitz, RL, et al. Is discordant growth in twins an independent risk factor for adverse neonatal outcome? Obstet Gynecol 2004; 103(1): 71–6.Google Scholar
Branum, AM, Schoendorf, KC. The effect of birth weight discordance on twin neonatal mortality. Obstet Gynecol 2003; 101(3): 570–4.Google Scholar
Demissie, K, Ananth, CV, Martin, J, et al. Fetal and neonatal mortality among twin gestations in the United States: the role of intrapair birth weight discordance. Obstet Gynecol 2002; 100(3): 474–80.Google Scholar
Gratacos, E, Carreras, E, Becker, J, et al. Prevalence of neurological damage in monochorionic twins with selective intrauterine growth restriction and intermittent absent or reversed end-diastolic umbilical artery flow. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2004; 24(2): 159–63.Google Scholar
Gulmezoglu, AM, Hofmeyr, GJ. Bed rest in hospital for suspected impaired fetal growth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000(2): CD000034.Google Scholar
Chasen, ST, Spiro, SJ, Kalish, RB, Chervenak, FA. Changes in fetal presentation in twin pregnancies. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2005; 17(1): 45–48.Google Scholar
Yang, Q, Wen, SW, Chen, Y, et al. Neonatal death and morbidity in vertex-nonvertex second twins according to mode of delivery and birth weight. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005; 192(3): 840–7.Google Scholar
Barrett, JF, Hannah, ME, Hutton, EK, et al. A randomized trial of planned cesarean or vaginal delivery for twin pregnancy. N Engl J Med 2013; 369(14): 1295–1305.Google Scholar
Fox, NS, Silverstein, M, Bender, S, et al. Active second-stage management in twin pregnancies undergoing planned vaginal delivery in a U.S. population. Obstet gynecol. 2010; 115(2 Pt 1): 229–233.Google Scholar
Davison, L, Easterling, TR, Jackson, JC, Benedetti, TJ. Breech extraction of low-birth-weight second twins: can cesarean section be justified? Am j obstet gynecol 1992; 166(2): 497–502.Google Scholar
Morales, WJ, O’Brien, WF, Knuppel, RA, Gaylord, S, Hayes, P. The effect of mode of delivery on the risk of intraventricular hemorrhage in nondiscordant twin gestations under 1500 g. Obstet Gynecol 1989; 73(1): 107–10.Google Scholar
Ford, AA, Bateman, BT, Simpson, LL. Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery in twin gestations: a large, nationwide sample of deliveries. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006; 195(4): 1138–42.Google Scholar
Miller, DA, Mullin, P, Hou, D, Paul, RH. Vaginal birth after cesarean section in twin gestation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996; 175(1): 194–8.Google Scholar
Sansregret, A, Bujold, E, Gauthier, RJ. Twin delivery after a previous caesarean: a twelve-year experience. J Obstet Gynaecol Canada 2003; 25(4): 294–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

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
×