Considering multifetal pregnancy reduction in triplet pregnancies: do we forget the emotional impact on fathers? A qualitative study from The Netherlands.

STUDY QUESTION: What factors influence the decision-making process of fathers regarding multifetal pregnancy reduction or maintaining a triplet pregnancy, and how do these decisions impact their psychological well-being? SUMMARY ANSWER: For fathers, the emotional impact of multifetal pregnancy reduction or caring for triplets is extensive and requires careful consideration. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Multifetal pregnancy reduction is a medical procedure with the purpose to reduce the number of fetuses to improve chances of a healthy outcome for both the remaining fetus(es) and the mother, either for medical reasons or social considerations. Aspects of the decision whether to perform multifetal pregnancy reduction have been rarely investigated, and the impact on fathers is unknown. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Qualitative study with semi-structured interviews between October 2021 and February 2023. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Fathers either after multifetal pregnancy reduction from triplet to twin or singleton pregnancy or ongoing triplet pregnancies 1-6 years after the decision were included. The interview schedule was designed to explore key aspects related to (i) the decision-making process whether to perform multifetal pregnancy reduction and (ii) the emotional aspects and psychological impact of the decision. Thematic analysis was used to identify patterns and trends in the father's data. The process involved familiarization with the data, defining and naming themes, and producing a final report. This study was a collaboration between a regional secondary hospital (OLVG) and a tertiary care hospital (Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam UMC), both situated in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Data saturation was achieved after 12 interviews. Five main themes were identified: (i) initial responses and emotional complexity, (ii) experiencing disparities in counselling quality and post-decision care, (iii) personal influences on the decision journey, (iv) navigating parenthood: choices, challenges, and emotional adaptation, and (v) shared wisdom and lessons. For fathers, the decision whether to maintain or reduce a triplet pregnancy is complex, in which medical, psychological but mainly social factors play an important role. In terms of psychological consequences after the decision, this study found that fathers after multifetal pregnancy reduction often struggled with difficult emotions towards the decision; some expressed feelings of doubt or regret and were still processing these emotions. Several fathers after an ongoing triplet had experienced a period of severe stress in the first years after the pregnancy, with major consequences for their mental health. Help in emotional processing was not offered to any of the fathers after the decision or birth. LIMITATION, REASONS FOR CAUTION: While our study focuses on the multifetal pregnancy reduction process in the Amsterdam region, we recognize the importance of further investigation into how this process may vary across different regions in The Netherlands and internationally. We acknowledge the potential of selection bias, as fathers with more positive experiences might have been more willing to participate. Caution is needed in interpreting the role of the mother in the recruitment process. Additionally, the time span of 1-6 years between the decision and the interviews may have influenced emotional processing and introduced potential reporting bias. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The emotional impact of multifetal pregnancy reduction or caring for triplets is significant, emphasizing the need for awareness among caregivers regarding the emotional challenges faced by fathers. A guided trajectory might optimize the decision-making and primarily facilitate the provision of appropriate care thereafter to optimize outcomes around decisions with potential traumatic implications. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study received no funding. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Adverse pregnancy outcome in fetuses with early increased nuchal translucency: prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: An increased nuchal translucency (NT) thickness of ≥ 3.5 mm is a well-established marker for congenital anomalies and adverse pregnancy outcome between 11 and 14 weeks' gestation, but little is known about its performance as a screening tool before 11 weeks. We aimed to investigate, in a prospective setting, whether fetuses with increased NT before 11 weeks are at risk for adverse pregnancy outcome. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study including pregnant women with a viable fetus with NT ≥ 2.5 mm and a crown-rump length (CRL) < 45 mm. All included women were referred to our fetal medicine unit (FMU) and scheduled for a follow-up scan where the NT was remeasured after 1 week when the CRL was > 45 mm. Two groups were evaluated: cases with a normalized NT (< 3.5 mm) and cases with persistently increased NT (≥ 3.5 mm). The cases were monitored until 4 weeks after delivery. The main outcome was a composite adverse outcome of aneuploidy, other genetic disorders, structural anomalies and pregnancy loss. We performed subgroup analyses of NT thickness at inclusion and normalized or persistently increased NT at follow-up. RESULTS: The study included 109 cases, of which 39 (35.8%) had an adverse pregnancy outcome. Of these, 64.1% (25/39) were aneuploid, corresponding to 22.9% (25/109) of the total study population. In the subgroups of NT thickness at inclusion of 2.5-3.4 mm, 3.5-4.4 mm and ≥ 4.5 mm, an adverse outcome was reported in 22.0% (9/41), 40.0% (18/45) and 52.2% (12/23), respectively. In fetuses with a normalized NT and without ultrasound abnormalities at the follow-up scan, the incidence of adverse outcome was 8.5% (5/59), of which 5.1% (3/59) cases were aneuploid. CONCLUSIONS: Fetuses with an early increased NT thickness are at considerable risk of an adverse pregnancy outcome, even if the NT normalizes after 11 weeks. Not all congenital anomalies can be diagnosed with routine first-trimester screening, such as non-invasive prenatal testing and/or a first-trimester anomaly scan. Therefore, expectant parents should always be referred to a FMU for detailed ultrasonography. Invasive prenatal testing should be offered if an increased NT of ≥ 2.5 mm is observed before 11 weeks' gestation. © 2024 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Resultado adverso del embarazo en fetos con aumento precoz de la translucencia nucal: estudio prospectivo de cohortes OBJETIVOS: El aumento del grosor de la translucencia nucal (TN) de ≥3,5 mm es un marcador bien establecido de anomalías congénitas y resultados adversos del embarazo entre las semanas 11 y 14 de gestación, pero se sabe poco sobre su rendimiento como herramienta de cribado antes de las 11 semanas. El objetivo fue investigar, en un contexto prospectivo, si los fetos con aumento de la TN antes de las 11 semanas corren riesgo de presentar resultados adversos del embarazo. MÉTODOS: Se trató de un estudio prospectivo de cohortes que incluyó a embarazadas con un feto viable con una TN ≥2,5 mm y una longitud céfalo­caudal (LCC) <45 mm. Todas las mujeres incluidas fueron remitidas a una unidad de medicina fetal (UMF) y con cita para una prueba de seguimiento en la que se volvió a medir la TN al cabo de 1 semana cuando la LCC era >45 mm. Se evaluaron dos grupos: casos con una TN normalizada (<3.5 mm) y casos con una TN persistentemente aumentada (≥3,5 mm). A los casos se les dio seguimiento hasta 4 semanas después del parto. El resultado principal fue un resultado adverso compuesto de aneuploidía, otros trastornos genéticos, anomalías estructurales y pérdida del embarazo. Se realizaron análisis de subgrupos del grosor de la TN en el momento de la inclusión y de la TN normalizada o persistentemente aumentada en el seguimiento. RESULTADOS: El estudio incluyó 109 casos, de los cuales 39 (35,8%) tuvieron un resultado adverso del embarazo. De ellos, el 64,1% (25/39) eran aneuploides, lo que supone el 22,9% (25/109) de la población total del estudio. En los subgrupos de grosor de la TN en el momento de la inclusión de 2,5­3,4 mm, 3,5­4,4 mm y ≥4,5 mm, se notificó un resultado adverso en el 22,0% (9/41), el 40,0% (18/45) y el 52,2% (12/23), respectivamente. En los fetos con una TN normalizada y sin anomalías ecográficas en la ecografía de seguimiento, la incidencia de resultados adversos fue del 8,5% (5/59), de los cuales el 5,1% (3/59) de los casos eran aneuploides. CONCLUSIONES: Los fetos con un aumento precoz del grosor de la TN corren un riesgo considerable de sufrir un resultado adverso del embarazo, incluso si la TN se normaliza después de 11 semanas. No todas las anomalías congénitas pueden diagnosticarse con un cribado rutinario en el primer trimestre, como las pruebas prenatales no invasivas y/o una ecografía de anomalías en el primer trimestre. Por lo tanto, los futuros padres siempre deben ser remitidos a una UMF para una ecografía detallada. Se debería ofrecer una prueba prenatal invasiva si se observa un aumento de la TN de ≥2,5 mm antes de las 11 semanas de gestación.

Eliminating first trimester combined testing: Consequences for early detection of significant fetal anomalies.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether implementation of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) testing for aneuploidy as a first-tier test and subsequent abolition of first trimester combined testing (FCT) affected the first trimester detection (<14 weeks) of certain fetal anomalies. METHODS: We performed a geographical cohort study in two Fetal Medicine Units between 2011 and 2020, including 705 fetuses with prenatally detected severe brain, abdominal wall and congenital heart defects. Cases were divided into two groups: before (n = 396) and after (n = 309) cfDNA introduction. The primary outcome was the first trimester detection rate (<14 weeks) overall and for non-chromosomal anomalies solely. RESULTS: Overall, gastroschisis, AVSD and HLHS were detected more often in the first trimester in the before group compared to the after group, respectively 54.5% versus 18.5% (p = 0.004), 45.9% versus 26.9% (p = 0.008) and 30% versus 3.4% (p = 0.005). After exclusion of chromosomal anomalies identifiable through cfDNA testing, the detection of AVSD remained higher in the before group (43.3% vs. 9.5%, p = 0.02), leading to a possible earlier gestation at termination. The termination of pregnancy (TOP) rate did not differ among the groups. In the after group, referrals for suspected anomalies following a dating scan between 11 and 14 weeks significantly increased from 17.4% to 29.1% (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This study underscores the value of a scan dedicated to fetal anatomy in the first trimester as we observed a decline in the early detection of certain fetal anomalies (detectable in the first trimester) subsequent to the abolition of FCT.

A historical narrative review through the field of tocolysis in threatened preterm birth.

Preterm birth presents a significant challenge in clinical obstetrics, requiring effective strategies to reduce associated mortality and morbidity risks. Tocolytic drugs, aimed at inhibiting uterine contractions, are a key aspect of addressing this challenge. Despite extensive research over many years, determining the most effective tocolytic agents remains a complex task, prompting better understanding of the underlying mechanisms of spontaneous preterm birth and recording meaningful outcome measures. This paper provides a comprehensive review of various obsolete and current tocolytic drug regimens that were instituted over the past century, examining both historical contexts and contemporary challenges in their development and adoption. The examination of historical debates and advancements highlights the complexity of introducing new therapies. While the search for effective tocolytics continues, questions arise regarding their actual benefits in obstetric care and the necessity for ongoing exploration. The presence of methodological limitations in current research emphasizes the importance of well-designed randomized controlled trials with robust endpoints and extended follow-up periods.In response to these complexities, the consideration of shifting towards prevention strategies aimed at addressing the root causes of preterm labor becomes more and more evident. This potential shift may offer a more effective approach than relying solely on tocolytics to delay labor initiation.Ultimately, effectively managing threatened preterm birth necessitates ongoing investigation, innovation, and a willingness to reassess strategies in pursuit of optimal outcomes for mothers, neonates, and long-term child health.