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-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T05:48:11.336Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 7 - Screening for Fetal Abnormality in Multiple Pregnancy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 October 2022

By
Carolina Bibbo ,
Julian N. Robinson  and
Beryl Benacerraf
Edited by
Leanne Bricker ,
Julian N. Robinson  and
Baskaran Thilaganathan
Leanne Bricker
Affiliation:
Corniche Hospital, Abu Dhabi
Julian N. Robinson
Affiliation:
Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston
Baskaran Thilaganathan
Affiliation:
St George's Hospital Medical School, University of London
Get access

Summary

The rate of structural malformations in monozygotic twins is higher than in dizygotic twins or singletons. The mechanical process of the embryo splitting may precipitate structural abnormalities leading to this higher incidence. Despite being genetically identical, monozygotic twins can be discordant for structural abnormality. Among the most common structural malformations in twin pregnancies are cardiac anomalies, neural tube and brain malformations, gastrointestinal and abdominal wall defects. Congenital heart disease is more prevalent in monochorionic twins, a proportion of which is caused in response to the abnormal physiology of twin-twin transfusion syndrome. First trimester ultrasound can identify those twin pregnancies at a higher risk of structural malformations and therefore lead to earlier detailed anatomy ultrasound and earlier prenatal diagnosis.

Type
Chapter
Information
Management of Multiple Pregnancies
A Practical Guide
 , pp. 64 - 75
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

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

Emery, SP et al. The North American Fetal Therapy Network Consensus Statement: prenatal management of uncomplicated monochorionic gestations. Obstet Gynecol 2015;125(5):1236–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glinianaia, SV, Rankin, J, Wright, C. Congenital anomalies in twins: a register-based study. Hum Reprod 2008;23(6):1306–11.Google Scholar
Bahtiyar, MO et al. The North American Fetal Therapy Network consensus statement: prenatal surveillance of uncomplicated monochorionic gestations. Obstet Gynecol 2015;125(1):118–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
D’Antonio, F et al. Crown–rump length discordance and adverse perinatal outcome in twin pregnancies: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014;44(2):138–46.Google Scholar
Salomon, LJ et al. Growth discrepancy in twins in the first trimester of pregnancy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2005;26(5):512–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fareeduddin, R et al. Discordance of first-trimester crown–rump length is a predictor of adverse outcomes in structurally normal euploid dichorionic twins. J Ultrasound Med 2010;29(10):1439–43.Google Scholar
Kalish, RB et al. First trimester prediction of growth discordance in twin gestations. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;189(3):706–9.Google Scholar
Harper, LM et al. First-trimester growth discordance and adverse pregnancy outcome in dichorionic twins. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013;41(6):627–31.Google Scholar
D’Antonio, F et al. Crown–rump length discordance and adverse perinatal outcome in twins: analysis of the Southwest Thames Obstetric Research Collaborative (STORK) multiple pregnancy cohort. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013;41(6):621–6.Google Scholar
Prats, P et al. Systematic review of screening for trisomy 21 in twin pregnancies in first trimester combining nuchal translucency and biochemical markers: a meta-analysis. Prenat Diagn 2014;34(11):1077–83.Google Scholar
Kagan, KO et al. Discordance in nuchal translucency thickness in the prediction of severe twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2007;29(5):527–32.Google Scholar
Stagnati, V et al. Early prediction of twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2017;49(5):573–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dias, T et al. Systematic labeling of twin pregnancies on ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011;38(2):130–3.Google Scholar
Khalil, A et al. ISUOG Practice Guidelines: role of ultrasound in twin pregnancy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2016;47(2):247–63.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
×