Perinatal outcomes of single intrauterine fetal demise in monochorionic diamniotic twins

  • Wen BIAN ,
  • Wenjun ZHOU ,
  • Tianchen WU ,
  • Peijing ZHU ,
  • Yinuo CHEN ,
  • Pengbo YUAN ,
  • Xueju WANG ,
  • Ying WANG ,
  • Yuan WEI , * ,
  • Yangyu ZHAO , *
Expand
  • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China
WEI Yuan, e-mail,
ZHAO Yangyu, e-mail,

Received date: 2022-06-21

  Online published: 2025-06-13

Copyright

All rights reserved. Unauthorized reproduction is prohibited.

Abstract

Objective: To compare the pregnancy outcomes of surviving fetuses in monochorionic diamniotic (MCDA) twin pregnancies after selective feticide or spontaneous single intrauterine fetal demise (sIUFD), and to explore the influencing factors of prognosis. Methods: A total of 219 cases of intra-uterine death of one fetus in MCDA twin pregnancies admitted to Peking University Third Hospital from September 2010 to August 2021 were collected. According to the mode of fetal death, they were divided into the spontaneous sIUFD group (120 cases) and the selective feticide group (99 cases). Data on the maternal conditions during pregnancy, the situation of the intrauterine-dead fetus, and pregnancy outcomes were collected for retrospective case-analysis. Results: The live-birth rates of surviving fetuses in the spontaneous sIUFD group and the selective feticide group were 85.0% and 81.8% respectively, and the total perinatal survival rates of surviving fetuses were 73.3% and 81.8% respectively, and there were no statistically significant differences. Compared with the spontaneous sIUFD group, the selective feticide group had a greater gestational week at delivery, and lower rate of preterm birth before 37 weeks, neonatal asphyxia, and early neonatal mortality. Using the gestational week at delivery as the outcome variable, Cox regression analysis showed that the mode of fetal death was not a risk factor affecting the gestational week at delivery of the surviving fetus, while gestational hypertension and the gestational week of fetal death were independent risk factors affecting the gestational week at delivery of the surviving fetus. Using preterm birth before 37 weeks, intrauterine death of the surviving fetus, and abnormal neonatal cranial ultrasound as outcome variables respectively, unconditional logistic regression analysis showed that the mode of fetal death, the gestational week of fetal death, the position of the dead fetus, and fetal complications were independent risk factors affecting the outcomes of the above-mentioned surviving fetuses. According to the results of the univariate analysis, the above risk factors were included in the multivariate regression analysis, and the results were the same as those of the univariate analysis. Conclusion: For MCDA twin pregnancy patients with severe twin-related complications, the prognosis of surviving fetuses after selective feticide is better. The proactive intrauterine intervention and treatment are of great significance for improving the prognosis of surviving fetuses.

Cite this article

Wen BIAN , Wenjun ZHOU , Tianchen WU , Peijing ZHU , Yinuo CHEN , Pengbo YUAN , Xueju WANG , Ying WANG , Yuan WEI , Yangyu ZHAO . Perinatal outcomes of single intrauterine fetal demise in monochorionic diamniotic twins[J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2025 , 57(3) : 592 -598 . DOI: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2025.03.025

单绒毛膜双羊膜囊(monochorionic diamniotic, MCDA)双胎妊娠由于存在胎盘血管吻合支,常出现双胎输血综合征(twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome, TTTS)、选择性胎儿生长受限(selective intrauterine growth restriction, sIUGR)、双胎反向动脉灌注序列征(twin reversed arterial perfusion, TRAPs)、双胎贫血-红细胞增多序列征(twin anemia polycythemia sequence, TAPS)等胎儿并发症或出现双胎之一畸形(monochorionic twins discordant for fetal anomaly, MTFDA)[1],存在发生双胎之一胎死宫内(single intrauterine fetal demise,sIUFD)的高风险,并且因为上述并发症可能引起存活儿低血压和急性失血等,进一步导致存活儿继发神经系统损伤(25%)或死亡(15%)等不良结局[2]。选择性减胎术被认为是减少存活儿神经系统损伤、提高存活率的重要干预手段[3],但选择性减胎术也存在妊娠丢失、胎膜早破和早产的风险[4-5],是否宫内干预及干预时机尚存争议。本研究比较MCDA双胎妊娠自发sIUFD和选择性减胎后的妊娠结局,探讨影响预后的风险因素,以研究选择性减胎术的临床应用,为改善妊娠结局提供临床证据。

1 资料与方法

1.1 研究对象

收集北京大学第三医院2010年9月至2021年8月在院分娩的MCDA双胎妊娠中一胎死亡的病例,分为自发sIUFD组和选择性减胎组。纳入标准:(1)MCDA双胎妊娠;(2)孕12周后复查仅见一活胎的自发sIUFD患者或孕12周后行选择性减胎术的患者。排除标准:(1)孕12周前胚胎停育或行选择性减胎术患者;(2)三胎及以上多胎妊娠减胎至MCDA双胎妊娠患者;(3)临床资料不全。

1.2 观察指标

采集如下信息:(1)母体情况:孕妇年龄、孕前体重指数(body mass index, BMI)、受孕方式、孕产次、既往史、母体妊娠合并症等;(2)胎儿情况:胎儿合并症、胎死方式(自发sIUFD/选择性减胎)、胎死/减胎孕周、死亡胎儿的宫内位置等;(3)妊娠结局:是否活产、分娩方式、分娩孕周、未足月胎膜早破(preterm premature rupture of membranes, PPROM)、新生儿出生体重、新生儿窒息、是否入住新生儿重症监护病房(neonatal intensive care unit, NICU)、神经系统损伤、早期新生儿死亡等。sIUFD的胎死孕周定义为首次确认胎儿死亡B超所对应的孕周,减胎孕周定义为行选择性减胎术的孕周(需B超确认减胎胎儿死亡)。胎儿合并症主要包括TTTS、sIUGR、TRAPs、TAPS、MTFDA等[6]。新生儿脑损伤以神经影像学检查发现异常改变为诊断依据,重度脑损伤定义为至少存在以下一种颅脑影像学表现:脑室内出血≥Ⅲ级、脑室周围白质软化≥Ⅱ级、(进行性或非进行性)脑室扩张≥97%、与不良的神经系统结果相关的动静脉梗塞或其他脑异常[7]。减胎使用的技术包括脐带结扎术、射频消融减胎术和微波消融减胎术[8-9]。本研究选择性减胎的指征包括:(1)Quintero分期Ⅲ期及以上的TTTS;(2)Ⅱ型及Ⅲ型sIUGR;(3)TRAPs伴供血胎儿水肿,或经超声及临床综合评估提示供血胎儿发生水肿风险较高;(4)双胎之一存在严重结构异常,包括染色体异常、无脑畸形、先天性心脏病等,而另一胎发育正常。

1.3 统计学分析

采用SPSS 24.0软件进行统计学分析, 所有计量资料均不符合正态分布,采用M (P25,P75)表示,应用Mann-Whitney U检验比较两组间计量资料的分布差异。计数资料、等级资料以频数及百分率表示,组间比较采用Pearson χ2检验。应用Kaplan-Meier方法描绘生存曲线,用Cox回归分析影响分娩孕周的因素,用非条件Logistics回归分析影响 < 37周早产、存活儿宫内死亡、新生儿颅脑B超异常等妊娠结局的因素,将单因素Logistics回归分析中P < 0.20的以及具有临床价值的P>0.20的因素纳入多因素回归分析,分别用风险比(hazard ratio,HR)、比值比(odds ratio,OR)反映各因素与因变量之间关联强度,以P < 0.05表示差异具有统计学意义。

2 结果

2.1 基本情况

共纳入自发sIUFD患者120例和选择性减胎患者99例,选择性减胎组的孕妇平均年龄大于自发sIUFD组,妊娠期糖尿病的患病比例高于自发sIUFD组(P < 0.05),孕前BMI、受孕方式、产次、妊娠期高血压疾病和其他合并症情况在两组间差异无统计学意义,详见表 1
表1 自发sIUFD组和选择性减胎组的一般情况比较

Table 1 Comparison of general situations between the spontaneous sIUFD group and the selective feticide group

Variables Spontaneous sIUFD group (n=120) Selective feticide group (n=99) P
Age/years, M (P25, P75) 30.00 (27.00, 32.75) 31.00 (29.00, 34.00) 0.013a
BMI/(kg/m2), M (P25, P75) 21.89 (19.52, 24.83) 21.88 (19.96, 24.22) 0.968a
Conception method, n (%) 0.669b
    Spontaneous pregnancy 107 (89.2) 90 (90.9)
    Assisted reproduction 13 (10.8) 9 (9.1)
Parity, n (%) 0.130b
    Primipara 90 (75.0) 65 (65.7)
    Multipara 30 (25.0) 34 (34.3)
Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, n (%) 18 (15.0) 18 (18.2) 0.527b
Gestational diabetes mellitus, n (%) 11 (9.2) 19 (19.2) 0.032b
Other comorbidities, n (%) 23 (19.2) 21 (21.2) 0.707b

a, Mann-Whitney U test for quantitative data; b, Pearson Chi-square test for qualitative data. BMI, body mass index; sIUFD, single intrauterine fetal demise.

2.2 胎儿合并症及宫内死亡情况

自发sIUFD组和选择性减胎组的胎儿并发症情况差异有统计学意义(P<0.001)。自发sIUFD组的中位胎死孕周大于选择性减胎组的中位减胎孕周,且差异具有统计学意义(P<0.001)。选择性减胎组几乎均于28周前完成减胎,而40.8%的自发sIUFD发生于28周以后。死亡胎儿位置、PPROM等情况差异均无统计学意义,详见表 2
表2 自发sIUFD组和选择性减胎组胎儿合并症及胎儿宫内死亡情况

Table 2 Fetal complications and stillbirth conditions in the spontaneous sIUFD group and the selective feticide group

Variables Spontaneous sIUFD group (n=120) Selective feticide group (n=99) P
Fetal complications, n (%) < 0.001a
    TTTS 41 (34.2) 14 (14.1)
    sIUGR 23 (19.2) 29 (29.3)
    TRAPs 2 (1.7) 19 (19.2)
    MTFDA 4 (3.3) 15 (15.2)
    Multiple 19 (15.8) 19 (19.2)
    None 31 (25.8) 3 (3.0)
Gestational weeks of sIUFD/feticide/weeks, M(P25,P75) 26.78 (22.71, 30.57) 21.64 (18.96, 24.71) < 0.001b
< 28 gestational weeks, n (%) 71 (59.2) 98 (99.0) < 0.001a
Location of the dead fetus, n (%) 0.213a
    Lower 77 (66.4) 72 (74.2)
    Higher 39 (33.6) 25 (25.8)

a, Pearson Chi-square test for qualitative data; b, Mann-Whitney U test for quantitative data. sIUFD, single intrauterine fetal demise; TTTS, twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome; sIUGR, selective intrauterine growth restriction; TRAPs, twin reversed arterial perfusion; MTFDA, monochorionic twins discordant for fetal anomaly.

2.3 妊娠结局比较

自发sIUFD组发生存活儿继发死胎、死产共计18例,其中胎死宫内2例,自然流产9例,家属放弃而引产6例,死产1例;选择性减胎组中发生存活儿继发死胎、死产共计18例,其中存活儿继发胎死宫内6例,自然流产6例,死产6例。自发SIUFD组的存活儿共计活产102例,选择性减胎组共计活产81例,两组存活儿活产率差异无统计学意义(85.0% vs.81.8%,P=0.573)。两组活产胎儿的妊娠结局比较见表 3
表3 自发sIUFD组与选择性减胎组活产胎儿的妊娠结局

Table 3 Pregnancy outcomes of live-born fetuses in the spontaneous sIUFD group and the selective feticide group

Variables Spontaneous sIUFD group (n=102) Selective feticide group (n=81) P
Cesarean section, n (%) 45 (44.1) 39 (48.1) 0.587a
Gestational week of delivery/weeks, M (P25, P75) 35.71 (32.36, 38.04) 37.43 (33.86, 38.93) 0.014b
PPROM, n (%) 18 (17.5) 19 (21.8) 0.449c
Preterm birth/weeks, n (%)
     < 30 10 (9.8) 5 (6.2) 0.374a
     < 32 24 (23.5) 13 (16.0) 0.211a
     < 33 37 (36.3) 21 (25.9) 0.135a
     < 37 60 (58.8) 34 (42.0) 0.024a
Transferred to NICU, n (%) 42 (41.2) 33 (40.7) 0.953a
Neonatal asphyxia, n (%) 14 (13.7) 1 (1.2) 0.002a
Neonatal birth weight/g, M (P25, P75) 2 295.00 (1 660.00, 2 962.50) 2 690.00 (1 880.00, 3 090.00) 0.064b
Small for gestational age infant, n (%) 35 (34.3) 22 (27.2) 0.299a
Early neonatal death, n (%) 14 (13.7) 0 (0) 0.001a
Abnormal neonatal cranial ultrasound, n (%) 25 (24.5) 19 (23.5) 0.868a

a, Pearson Chi-Square test for qualitative and ordinal data; b, Mann-Whitney U test for quantitative data. sIUFD, single intrauterine fetal demise; PPROM, preterm premature rupture of membranes; NICU, neonatal intensive care unit.

自发sIUFD组和选择性减胎组的中位分娩孕周差异有统计学意义(35.6周vs.37.3周,P=0.014)。进一步使用Kaplan-Meier法绘制两组分娩孕周的生存曲线,结果显示选择性减胎组的分娩孕周更大(P=0.041),详见图 1
图1 自发sIUFD组和选择性减胎组的分娩孕周

Figure 1 Gestational weeks at delivery of the spontaneous sIUFD group and the selective feticide group

sIUFD, single intrauterine fetal demise.

相比于自发sIUFD组,选择性减胎组的活产胎儿中37周前的早产率更低(P=0.024),新生儿窒息率更低(P=0.002),并且未出现早期新生儿死亡病例(P < 0.001)。自发sIUFD组发生早期新生儿死亡14例(14/102,13.7%),其中7例出生后因家属放弃救治而死亡,4例因器官衰竭、感染休克等抢救无效或放弃抢救而死亡,3例因家属担心神经系统预后不良放弃救治而死亡,平均胎死孕周为27.84周,平均分娩孕周为29.74周,胎死到分娩的间隔时间为1.91周。
产后的新生儿头颅超声检查发现自发sIUFD组和选择性减胎组分别有25例(25/102,24.5%)和19例(19/81,23.5%)新生儿存在大脑发育异常,其中大部分表现为局限性侧脑室出血、侧脑室增宽或脑白质损伤,损伤程度较轻,但自发sIUFD组出现4例(4/102, 3.9%)严重脑损伤,其中2例达Ⅲ度侧脑室出血,1例出现脑实质广泛软化,1例出现侧脑室出血伴化脓性脑膜炎。
自发sIUFD组的存活儿围生期总存活率为73.3%,选择性减胎组的存活儿围生期总存活率为81.8%,差异无明显统计学意义(P=0.135)。

2.4 影响存活儿结局的因素分析

为分析孕妇年龄、妊娠并发症、胎儿并发症、胎死方式(自发sIUFD/选择性减胎)、死胎位置、胎死孕周等因素对于存活儿妊娠结局的影响,利用Cox回归分析上述因素与分娩孕周的关系,结果显示,胎死方式并非影响存活儿分娩孕周的风险因素,而妊娠期高血压和胎死孕周为影响存活儿分娩孕周的独立风险因素,即孕妇患有妊娠期高血压、胎死孕周越大,存活儿分娩孕周更大的风险越高。利用非条件Logistics回归分别分析上述因素与<37周早产、存活儿宫内死亡、新生儿颅脑B超异常等因变量之间的关系,结果显示胎死方式、胎死孕周、死胎位置和胎儿并发症等为影响上述存活儿结局的独立风险因素,即使用选择性减胎术患者,存活儿胎死宫内风险较低;胎死宫内孕周越大,分娩孕周更大、37周前早产、新生儿颅脑B超异常的风险越高;死胎位置越低,37周前早产的风险越高;合并TTTS、TRAPs、sIUGR、MTFDA或同时合并多种合并症,存活儿胎死宫内风险越高。
根据单因素分析结果,将上述风险因素纳入多因素回归分析,结果与单因素分析相同,详见表 4
表4 影响妊娠结局的风险因素分析

Table 4 Analysis of risk factors affecting pregnancy outcomes

Variables Gestational weeks of delivery, HR (95%CI) Preterm birth (< 37 weeks), OR (95%CI) Viable fetus died in utero, OR (95%CI) Abnormal neonatal cranial ultrasound, OR (95%CI)
Age 0.984(0.911-1.062)
Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy 1.644 (1.116-2.423)* 2.072 (0.839-5.117)
Gestational diabetes mellitus 0.564 (0.177-1.799)
Selective feticide 1.102 (0.727-1.672) 2.298 (0.912-5.791) 0.333 (0.141-0.788)* 2.505 (0.906-6.924)
Gestational weeks of fetal death 1.070 (1.034-1.107) 1.204 (1.107-1.310) 0.934 (0.863-1.009) 1.129 (1.034-1.232)#
Dead fetus lies lower 2.232 (1.047-4.760)*
TTTS 1.359 (0.842-2.193) 1.838 (0.648-5.213) 9.524 (2.025-44.798)# 1.840 (0.600-5.645)
TRAPs 0.789 (0.399-1.558) 0.400 (0.085-1.884) 8.964 (1.369-58.681)* 0.234 (0.022-2.450)
sIUGR 0.783 (0.264-2.322) 0.706 (0.233-2.141) 7.138 (1.364-37.342)* 0.642 (0.189-2.176)
MTFDA 0.627 (0.130-3.028) 0.727 (0.144-3.671) 10.506 (1.638-67.394)* 1.027 (0.195-5.397)
Multiple complications 1.464 (0.467-4.592) 1.322 (0.414-4.223) 7.292 (1.401-37.943)* 0.765 (0.210-2.785)

*P < 0.05; #P < 0.01; ▲P < 0.001. TTTS, twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome; TRAPs, twin reversed arterial perfusion; sIUGR, selective intrauterine growth restriction; MTFDA, monochorionic twins discordant for fetal anomaly.

3 讨论

3.1 MCDA双胎妊娠选择性减胎与自发sIUFD的妊娠结局

当MCDA双胎妊娠出现自发sIUFD时,由于其胎盘存在丰富的血管吻合支,可能会出现由存活儿向死胎的单向输血,进而导致存活儿的低血压,这可能与存活儿继发神经系统损伤、胎死宫内相关[9];与之类似,MCDA双胎的选择性减胎术也存在改变胎盘血流动力学的可能性,但手术通过内镜结扎或热消融的方式阻断了被减去胎儿的脐带血流,有利于减少存活儿向其灌注血液,并且相较于自发sIUFD长期、缓慢的单向输血过程,选择性减胎术中单向输血的持续时间非常有限,因而选择性减胎术对存活儿的损伤更小,对其长期发育更有利。既往文献[9-12]报道,MCDA双胎妊娠行选择性减胎后活产率为73.3%至81.3%,本研究选择性减胎组的活产率为81.8%(81/99例),与既往文献[9-12]报道类似;本研究中自发sIUFD组的活产率为85.0%(102/120例),也与既往文献[2, 13]报道类似。本研究中选择性减胎组和自发sIUFD组的活产率差异无统计学意义,但值得注意的是,选择性减胎组孕妇的年龄更大、母体并发症更多,两组的胎儿并发症情况及分期、分型也存在差异,上述因素本身也可能与较差的妊娠结局有关[14-16],由于本研究数据量有限,难以进一步展开分层分析。
本研究中选择性减胎组未出现早期新生儿死亡,但在自发sIUFD组中早期新生儿死亡率为13.7%,低于既往文献[17]报道的27.9%。本研究自发sIUFD组中,与未发生早期新生儿死亡的病例相比,出现早期新生儿死亡的病例发生sIUFD的孕周更大,且sIUFD到分娩之间的时间间隔更短,出生后可能具有更严重的新生儿并发症,往往难以存活,或因家长担心新生儿预后不良(尤其是神经系统预后不佳)放弃救治而死亡。既往研究[16]表明,妊娠中晚期发生sIUFD的病例,存活儿的不良妊娠结局风险更高,早产及相关并发症如新生儿肺发育不全、新生儿死亡风险增加,此外,也有研究[18]发现,28周以后发生的sIUFD更有可能导致存活儿的神经系统异常,也与本研究相符。本研究中,选择性减胎术的使用有利于降低存活儿的早期新生儿死亡率,推测可能与选择性减胎术实行时孕周较小、手术时间较短、胎盘交通支血流阻断更彻底相关,相比于自发sIUFD中存在的长期、慢性输血过程或sIUFD孕周较大时存活儿出现的短期、大量急性失血过程,选择性减胎术改善了存活儿的宫内生存发育状况,存活儿出生后的生存能力更强。
本研究中,选择性减胎组的中位分娩孕周为37.43周,自发sIUFD组的中位分娩孕周为35.71周,选择性减胎组的分娩孕周更大,且差异具有统计学意义(P=0.014);本研究中选择性减胎组的早产率为42.0%,自发sIUFD组的早产率为58.8%,选择性减胎组的早产率更低,且差异具有统计学意义(P=0.024)。相比于自发sIUFD,选择性减胎术降低了存活儿早产的风险,延长了分娩孕周,有利于改善存活儿预后。
本研究对存活儿进行神经系统预后评估,发现两组存活儿均有近四分之一(自发sIUFD组24.5%,选择性减胎组23.5%,差异无统计学意义)在出生后出现了颅脑B超异常,但多随日龄增加逐渐恢复;Hillman等[2]研究发现MCDA双胎妊娠发生sIUFD后,存活儿出现颅脑影像学异常的比率为34%,van Klink等[19]的研究提示MCDA双胎妊娠发生sIUFD后存活儿的严重脑损伤发生率为26%,均与本研究相符。此外,自发sIUFD组出现了3.9%(4/102例)的严重脑损伤病例,根据van den Bos等[20]的研究,对88例MCDA双胎妊娠孕妇行选择性减胎术,在存活儿中检出严重脑损伤的比例为3.4%(3/88例),与另一研究[4]中4.8% (3/62例)的结果类似,也与本研究基本一致。此外,也有国外研究[21]随访了MCDA双胎妊娠孕妇行选择性减胎的患者,发现6.8%(5/74例)的新生儿存在神经系统发育迟缓。对MCDA双胎妊娠而言,sIUFD的发生会引起存活儿经胎盘吻合血管的急性失血,导致存活儿出现低灌注,进一步造成包括神经系统在内的多器官缺氧、酸中毒和损伤的发生[22]。尽管选择性减胎术被认为是减少MCDA后代潜在神经系统损伤的重要干预措施,但本研究对两组新生儿进行颅脑超声检查发现,两组人群超声结果异常概率的差异无明显统计学意义,且单因素Logistics回归分析也并未提示选择性减胎术的使用是改善新生儿神经系统预后的影响因素;同时应注意到,本研究对新生儿神经系统发育的长期随访证据不足,仍有必要利用MRI[23]、超声等技术对MCDA双胎妊娠自发sIUFD和选择性减胎后的存活儿进行产前和产后的脑成像检查,并建立规范化随访程序,利用评估问卷(如《年龄与发育进程问卷》)等手段完成标准的神经发育评估,以了解相关存活儿的长期发育情况。

3.2 影响存活儿预后的潜在因素

本研究发现,对于MCDA双胎妊娠孕妇,合并胎儿并发症(包括TTTS、sIUGR、TRAPs、MTFDA或同时合并多种并发症)是存活儿胎死宫内的危险因素,同时也发现,相较于自发sIUFD,选择性减胎术是存活儿活产的保护因素,为选择性减胎术改善sIUFD人群的妊娠结局提供了证据支持。更为重要的是,本研究发现胎死/减胎孕周是影响MCDA双胎妊娠存活儿围产期不良结局的危险因素之一,较大的胎死/减胎孕周与存活儿更差的预后有关。依据sIUFD的病理机制进行推测,胎死/减胎孕周越大,胎盘血管吻合支可能越多,sIUFD后存活儿的失血量可能会更多,宫内发育更差;此外,胎死/减胎孕周越大,死亡胎儿的胎块越大,其释放的坏死物质也会更多,进一步导致宫内环境更差,影响存活儿发育。既往国外研究[5, 20]认为,妊娠18周之后减胎,存活儿具有更高的围产期存活率,亦有研究[14]指出,与中晚孕期相比,在妊娠16周前后进行选择性减胎的存活儿存活率差异无统计学意义,早期进行选择性减胎是安全可行的,但TTTS、sIUGR和TAPS等胎儿并发症往往在妊娠16周之后才得以诊断,起初病情较轻,随孕周增加病情逐渐发展。《双胎妊娠临床处理指南(2020年更新)》等[6, 24-27]指出,对于发病初期的上述胎儿并发症,均建议保守治疗,仅对病情进展的患者(如Ⅱ型和Ⅲ型sIUGR患者同时出现宫内恶化迹象、Quintero分期Ⅱ~Ⅳ期病例或进展型QuinteroⅠ期TTTS患者)建议行宫内干预,此时患者多数已孕周较大,选择性减胎后出现存活儿围产期不良结局的风险较高,因此,对存在sIUFD高风险的孕妇加强监测,预防中晚孕期sIUFD的发生,并个体化选择较早的、合适的时机进行选择性减胎术或其他干预是非常必要的。此外,国外有文献[11, 28-29]对MCDA双胎妊娠合并不同胎儿并发症的人群进行研究,发现不同并发症行选择性减胎术后存活儿预后的差异存在统计学意义,就活产率而言,TTTS组和MTDFA组较高,而sIUGR组预后较低,但仍待进一步大样本临床研究来明确胎死/减胎孕周及不同胎儿并发症如何影响存活儿预后,并确认最佳减胎孕周。
本研究发现,死亡胎儿的位置也影响存活儿的预后,死亡胎儿位于下方会增加早产的风险,推测可能与死亡胎块距离宫颈更近、坏死组织对于局部的刺激更大、更容易增加宫内感染风险以及诱发绒毛膜羊膜炎、胎膜早破等密切相关[30],提示在进行选择性减胎术前需将该因素纳入评估,并增加对死亡胎儿位于下方的sIUFD患者的关注。
此外,本研究为单医学中心的回顾性病例研究,纳入的病例数目有限,未能随访曾于北京大学第三医院行选择性减胎术治疗但于其他医学中心分娩病例的妊娠结局情况,且本研究所在的医学中心会接受大量自行就诊或外院转诊的复杂双胎妊娠患者,这些人群往往病情较为复杂,继续妊娠的愿望极为强烈,可能存在一定的人群偏倚。
总体而言,MCDA双胎妊娠发生sIUFD可能对存活儿的妊娠结局产生不良影响,对于存在严重双胎并发症者,进行选择性减胎术后的存活儿预后更好,积极的宫内干预治疗对于改善存活儿预后具有重要的意义。

利益冲突  所有作者均声明不存在利益冲突。

作者贡献声明  卞雯、周文君:设计研究方案,收集、整理、分析数据,协调团队,撰写论文;吴天晨:分析数据,设计研究方案;朱培静、陈一诺:收集、整理数据;原鹏波、王学举、王颖:设计研究方案;魏瑗、赵扬玉:提出研究思路,设计研究方案。

1
Gratacós E , Ortiz JU , Martinez JM . A systematic approach to the differential diagnosis and management of the complications of monochorionic twin pregnancies[J]. Fetal Diagn Ther, 2012, 32 (3): 145- 155.

DOI

2
Hillman SC , Morris RK , Kilby MD . Co-twin prognosis after single fetal death: A systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Obstet Gynecol, 2011, 118 (4): 928- 940.

DOI

3
Rahimi-Sharbaf F , Ghaemi M , Nassr AA , et al. Radiofrequency ablation for selective fetal reduction in complicated monochorionic twins; comparing the outcomes according to the indications[J]. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 2021, 21 (1): 189.

DOI

4
Peng R , Xie HN , Lin MF , et al. Clinical outcomes after selective fetal reduction of complicated monochorionic twins with radiofrequency ablation and bipolar cord coagulation[J]. Gynecol Obstet Invest, 2016, 81 (6): 552- 558.

DOI

5
Rossi AC , D'Addario V . Umbilical cord occlusion for selective feticide in complicated monochorionic twins: A systematic review of literature[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2009, 200 (2): 123- 129.

DOI

6
中华医学会围产医学分会胎儿医学学组, 中华医学会妇产科学分会产科学组. 双胎妊娠临床处理指南(2020年更新)[J]. 中国产前诊断杂志(电子版), 2021, 13 (1): 51- 63.

7
van Klink JM , Koopman HM , Rijken M , et al. Long-Term neurodevelopmental outcome in survivors of twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome[J]. Twin Res Hum Genet, 2016, 19 (3): 255- 261.

DOI

8
谢家磊, 吴天晨, 王晓莉, 等. 微波消融和射频消融减胎术治疗复杂性单绒毛膜妊娠的比较[J]. 中国生育健康杂志, 2022, 33 (1): 14- 17.

9
Meng X , Yuan P , Gong L , et al. Forty-five consecutive cases of complicated monochorionic multiple pregnancy treated with microwave ablation: A single-center experience[J]. Prenat Diagn, 2019, 39 (4): 293- 298.

DOI

10
Dadhwal V , Sharma KA , Rana A , et al. Perinatal outcome in monochorionic twin pregnancies after selective fetal reduction using radiofrequency ablation[J]. Int J Gynaecol Obstet, 2022, 157 (2): 340- 346.

DOI

11
Kumar S , Paramasivam G , Zhang E , et al. Perinatal- and procedure-related outcomes following radiofrequency ablation in monochorionic pregnancy[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2014, 210 (5): 454.e1- 454.e6.

DOI

12
Gaerty K , Greer RM , Kumar S . Systematic review and metaanalysis of perinatal outcomes after radiofrequency ablation and bipolar cord occlusion in monochorionic pregnancies[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2015, 213 (5): 637- 643.

DOI

13
王颖, 魏瑗, 原鹏波, 等. 单绒毛膜双胎之一胎死宫内的共存儿预后分析[J]. 中华医学杂志, 2016, 96 (37): 3003- 3007.

14
Ting YH , Poon LCY , Tse WT , et al. Outcome of radiofrequency ablation for selective fetal reduction before vs at or after 16 gestational weeks in complicated monochorionic pregnancy[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2021, 58 (2): 214- 220.

DOI

15
Shinar S , Agrawal S , El-Chaar D , et al. Selective fetal reduction in complicated monochorionic twin pregnancies: A comparison of techniques[J]. Prenat Diagn, 2021, 41 (1): 52- 60.

DOI

16
Ong SS , Zamora J , Khan KS , et al. Prognosis for the co-twin following single-twin death: A systematic review[J]. BJOG, 2006, 113 (9): 992- 998.

DOI

17
Mackie FL , Rigby A , Morris RK , et al. Prognosis of the co-twin following spontaneous single intrauterine fetal death in twin pregnancies: A systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. BJOG, 2019, 126 (5): 569- 578.

DOI

18
O'Donoghue K , Rutherford MA , Engineer N , et al. Transfusional fetal complications after single intrauterine death in monochorionic multiple pregnancy are reduced but not prevented by vascular occlusion[J]. BJOG, 2009, 116 (6): 804- 812.

DOI

19
van Klink JM , van Steenis A , Steggerda SJ , et al. Single fetal demise in monochorionic pregnancies: incidence and patterns of cerebral injury[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2015, 45 (3): 294- 300.

DOI

20
van den Bos EM , van Klink JM , Middeldorp JM , et al. Perinatal outcome after selective feticide in monochorionic twin pregnancies[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2013, 41 (6): 653- 658.

DOI

21
van Klink J , Koopman HM , Middeldorp JM , et al. Long-term neurodevelopmental outcome after selective feticide in mono-chorionic pregnancies[J]. BJOG, 2015, 122 (11): 1517- 1524.

DOI

22
Fusi L , McParland P , Fisk N , et al. Acute twin-twin transfusion: A possible mechanism for brain-damaged survivors after intra-uterine death of a monochorionic twin[J]. Obstet Gynecol, 1991, 78 (3 Pt 2): 517- 520.

23
Counsell SJ , Rutherford MA , Cowan FM , et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of preterm brain injury[J]. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed, 2003, 88 (4): 269- 274.

DOI

24
中国妇幼保健协会双胎妊娠专业委员会. 双胎输血综合征诊治及保健指南(2020)[J]. 中国实用妇科与产科杂志, 2020, 36 (8): 714- 721.

25
中国妇幼保健协会双胎妊娠专业委员会. 选择性胎儿宫内生长受限诊治及保健指南(2020)[J]. 中国实用妇科与产科杂志, 2020, 36 (7): 618- 625.

26
中国妇幼保健协会双胎妊娠专业委员会. 双胎反向动脉灌注序列征诊治及保健指南(2020)[J]. 中国实用妇科与产科杂志, 2020, 36 (6): 524- 530.

27
中华医学会围产医学分会胎儿医学学组, 中华医学会妇产科学分会产科学组. 双胎妊娠临床处理指南(第二部分): 双胎妊娠并发症的诊治[J]. 中国产前诊断杂志(电子版), 2015, 7 (4): 57- 64.

28
Yinon Y , Ashwal E , Weisz B , et al. Selective reduction in complicated monochorionic twins: prediction of obstetric outcome and comparison of techniques[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2015, 46 (6): 670- 677.

DOI

29
Sun L , Zou G , Yang Y , et al. Risk factors for fetal death after radiofrequency ablation for complicated monochorionic twin pregnancies[J]. Prenat Diagn, 2018, 38 (7): 499- 503.

DOI

30
Ward PL , Reidy KL , Palma-Dias R , et al. Single intrauterine death in twins: The importance of fetal order[J]. Twin Res Hum Genet, 2018, 21 (6): 556- 562.

DOI

Outlines

/