Multifetal pregnancy reduction by transvaginal puncture: Evaluation of the technique used in 134 cases

Ilan E. Timor-Tritsch, David B. Peisner, Ana Monteagudo, Jodi P. Lerner, Shubhra Sharma

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

81 Scopus citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This report reviews multifetal pregnancy reductions performed transvaginally and tests the feasibility and associated pregnancy loss rates with this technique. STUDY DESIGN: One hundred thirty-four consecutive multifetal pregnancy reductions were analyzed regarding different aspects of total pregnancy losses and complications. The first 40 manually performed were compared with the last 94 procedures performed with an automated puncture device and a thin needle. The losses were also analyzed as a comparison of the reduction of the lower-lying with the higher-lying fetuses located in relation to the internal os. RESULTS: A total uncorrected total pregnancy loss rate of 12.6% and a corrected loss rate of 10.6% was observed. Of the 112 pregnancies in which the lower-lying fetus was reduced, 11 losses were seen. The loss rate in the group reducing the upper fetus was three of 22. The manual versus the puncture device groups showed the same loss rate (10%); however, the manual group had a larger number of subchorionic hematomas after the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The data are indicative of a very low maternal complication rate (infection) and an acceptable loss rate of the entire pregnancy. The loss rates compare favorable with those for multifetal pregnancy reduction performed transabdominally.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)799-804
Number of pages6
JournalAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Volume168
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 1993
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Multifetal pregnancy reduction
  • transvaginal puncture

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Multifetal pregnancy reduction by transvaginal puncture: Evaluation of the technique used in 134 cases'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this