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-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T09:17:11.643Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 28 - Anesthesia for Rare Fetal and Placental Conditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 January 2024

By
Marla B. Ferschl  and
Mark D. Rollins
Edited by
David R. Gambling ,
M. Joanne Douglas  and
Grace Lim
David R. Gambling
Affiliation:
University of California, San Diego
M. Joanne Douglas
Affiliation:
University of British Columbia, Vancouver
Grace Lim
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
Get access

Summary

In utero intervention for fetal anomalies or abnormal placentation should only occur for conditions known to result in ongoing irreversible harm to the fetus or increased risk to the mother. For in utero fetal treatment procedures there should be evidence that potential harm from the fetal lesion is best mitigated by intervention at a gestational age with superior outcomes than ex utero neonatal treatment. Although most fetal anomalies are not amenable to in utero treatment, two conditions with significant evidence of improved outcomes include use of fetoscopic laser photocoagulation to treat twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome and mid-gestational in utero open fetal surgery to treat myelomeningocele. Minimally invasive fetal treatment techniques are typically performed under local or regional anesthesia, while open fetal procedures are done under general anesthesia. Successful fetal intervention requires extensive multidisciplinary planning and collaboration. In addition to anesthetic considerations employed for nonobstetric surgery during pregnancy, fetal anesthesia and analgesia, fetal monitoring, uterine relaxation, and preparation for emergent maternal and fetal events are all necessary. Future research into anesthetic techniques for various maternal-fetal procedures is key to optimizing clinical outcomes and advancing the field of fetal surgery and maternal-fetal medicine.

Keywords

fetal surgeryEXIT procedurefetal physiologyfetal painfetal treatmentfetal anesthesiafetal monitoringmaternal-fetal anesthesiaabnormal placentationtwin-to-twin transfusionmyelomeningocele
Type
Chapter
Information
Obstetric Anesthesia and Uncommon Disorders , pp. 456 - 468
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2024

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

Johnson, A. Diagnosis and management of twin-twin transfusion syndrome. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2015;58:611–631.Google Scholar
Quintero, RA, Morales, WJ, Allen, MH, et al. Staging of twin-twin transfusion syndrome. J Perinatol 1999;19:550–555.Google Scholar
Roberts, D, Gates, S, Kilby, M, et al. Interventions for twin–twin transfusion syndrome: a Cochrane review. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008;31:701–711.Google Scholar
Simpson, LL. Twin-twin transfusion syndrome. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013;208:3–18.Google Scholar
Khalek, N, Johnson, MP, Bebbington, MW. Fetoscopic laser therapy for twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome. Semin Pediatr Surg 2013;22:18–23.Google Scholar
Sago, H, Ishii, K, Sugibayashi, R, et al. Fetoscopic laser photocoagulation for twin-twin transfusion syndrome. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2018;44:831–839.Google Scholar
Senat, M-V, Deprest, J, Boulvain, M, et al. Endoscopic laser surgery versus serial amnioreduction for severe twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome. N Engl J Med 2004;351:136–144.Google Scholar
Bamberg, C, Hecher, K. Update on twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2019;58:55–65.Google Scholar
Di Mascio, D, Khalil, A, D’Amico, A, et al. Outcome of twin-twin transfusion syndrome according to Quintero stage of disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2020;56:811–820.Google Scholar
Stirnemann, J, Slaghekke, F, Khalek, N, et al. Intrauterine fetoscopic laser surgery versus expectant management in stage 1 twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome: an international randomized trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2021;224:528.e1–528.e12.Google Scholar
Moore, TR, Gale, S, Benirschke, K. Perinatal outcome of forty-nine pregnancies complicated by acardiac twinning. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990;163:907–912.Google Scholar
Healey, MG. Acardia: predictive risk factors for the co-twin’s survival. Teratology 1994;50:205–213.Google Scholar
Lee, H, Bebbington, M, Crombleholme, TM. The North American Fetal Therapy Network Registry data on outcomes of radiofrequency ablation for twin-reversed arterial perfusion sequence. Fetal Diagn Ther 2013;33:224–229.Google Scholar
Sousa M, Tavares de, Glosemeyer, P, Diemert, A, et al. First-trimester intervention in twin reversed arterial perfusion sequence. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2020;55:47–49.Google Scholar
Chaveeva, P, Poon, LC, Sotiriadis, A, et al. Optimal method and timing of intrauterine intervention in twin reversed arterial perfusion sequence: case study and meta-analysis. Fetal Diagn Ther 2014;35:267–279.Google Scholar
Shettikeri, A, Acharya, VS, Sahana, R, et al. Outcome of pregnancies diagnosed with TRAP sequence prenatally: a single-centre experience. Fetal Diagn Ther 2020;47:301–306.Google Scholar
Farrugia, MK. Fetal bladder outflow obstruction: interventions, outcomes and management uncertainties. Early Hum Dev 2020;150:105189.Google Scholar
Ruano, R. Fetal surgery for severe lower urinary tract obstruction. Prenat Diagn 2011;31:667–674.Google Scholar
Lyons, K, Cassady, C, Mehollin-Ray, A, et al. Current role of fetal magnetic resonance imaging in body anomalies. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2015;36: 310–323.Google Scholar
Quintero, RA, Gomez Castro, LA, Bermudez, C, et al. In utero management of fetal lower urinary tract obstruction with a novel shunt: a landmark development in fetal therapy. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2010;23: 806–812.Google Scholar
Nassr, AA, Shazly, SAM, Abdelmagied, AM, et al. Effectiveness of vesicoamniotic shunt in fetuses with congenital lower urinary tract obstruction: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2017;49:696–703.Google Scholar
Saccone, G, D’Alessandro, P, Escolino, M, et al. Antenatal intervention for congenital fetal lower urinary tract obstruction (LUTO): a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2020;33:2664–2670.Google Scholar
Dingeldein, M. Congenital diaphragmatic hernia: management & outcomes. Adv Pediatr 2018;65:241–247.Google Scholar
Deprest, JA, Nicolaides, K, Gratacos, E. Fetal surgery for congenital diaphragmatic hernia is back from never gone. Fetal Diagn Ther 2011;29:6–17.Google Scholar
Russo, FM, De Coppi, P, Allegaert, K, et al. Current and future antenatal management of isolated congenital diaphragmatic hernia. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med 2017;22: 383–390.Google Scholar
Deprest, JA, Nicolaides, KH, Benachi, A, et al. Randomized trial of fetal surgery for severe left diaphragmatic hernia. N Engl J Med 2021;385:107–118.Google Scholar
Deprest, JA, Benachi, A, Gratacos, E, et al. Randomized trial of fetal surgery for moderate left diaphragmatic hernia. N Engl J Med 2021;385:119–129.Google Scholar
Halder, V, Ghosh, S, Shrimanth, YS, et al. Fetal cardiac intervention and fetal cardiac surgery: where are we in 21st century? Am J Cardiovasc Dis 2021;11:642–646.Google Scholar
Nassr, AA, Shazly, SA, Morris, SA, et al. Prenatal management of fetal intrapericardial teratoma: a systematic review. Prenat Diagn 2017;37:849–863.Google Scholar
Araujo Junior, E, Tonni, G, Chung, M, et al. Perinatal outcomes and intrauterine complications following fetal intervention for congenital heart disease: systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2016;48:426–433.Google Scholar
Arzt, W, Wertaschnigg, D, Veit, I, et al. Intrauterine aortic valvuloplasty in fetuses with critical aortic stenosis: experience and results of 24 procedures. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011;37:689–695.Google Scholar
McElhinney, DB, Marshall, AC, Wilkins-Haug, LE, et al. Predictors of technical success and postnatal biventricular outcome after in utero aortic valvuloplasty for aortic stenosis with evolving hypoplastic left heart syndrome. Circulation 2009;120: 1482–1490.Google Scholar
Van Mieghem, T, Al-Ibrahim, A, Deprest, J, et al. Minimally invasive therapy for fetal sacrococcygeal teratoma: case series and systematic review of the literature. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014;43:611–619.Google Scholar
Peiró, JL, Sbragia, L, Scorletti, F, et al. Management of fetal teratomas. Pediatr Surg Int 2016;32:635–647.Google Scholar
Sananes, N, Javadian, P, Werneck Britto I, Schwach, et al. Technical aspects and effectiveness of percutaneous fetal therapies for large sacrococcygeal teratomas: cohort study and literature review. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2016;47:712–719.Google Scholar
Braun, T, Brauer, M, Fuchs, I, et al. Mirror syndrome: a systematic review of fetal associated conditions, maternal presentation and perinatal outcome. Fetal Diagn Ther 2010;27:191–203.Google Scholar
Chen, R, Liu, M, Yan, J, et al. Clinical characteristics of mirror syndrome: a retrospective study of 16 cases. J Obstet Gynaecol 2021;41:73–76.Google Scholar
Baird, R, Puligandla, PS, Laberge, JM. Congenital lung malformations: informing best practice. Semin Pediatr Surg 2014;23:270–277.Google Scholar
Mallmann, MR, Graham, V, Rosing, B, et al. Thoracoamniotic shunting for fetal hydrothorax: predictors of intrauterine course and postnatal outcome. Fetal Diagn Ther 2017;41:58–65.Google Scholar
Peranteau, WH, Adzick, NS, Boelig, MM, et al. Thoracoamniotic shunts for the management of fetal lung lesions and pleural effusions: a single-institution review and predictors of survival in 75 cases. J Pediatr Surg 2015;50:301–305.Google Scholar
Grethel, EJ, Wagner, AJ, Clifton, MS, et al. Fetal intervention for mass lesions and hydrops improves outcome: a 15-year experience. J Pediatr Surg 2007;42:117–123.Google Scholar
Blumenfeld, YJ, Belfort, MA. Updates in fetal spina bifida repair. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2018;30:123–129.Google Scholar
Adzick, NS, Thom, EA, Spong, CY, et al. A randomized trial of prenatal versus postnatal repair of myelomeningocele. N Engl J Med 2011;364:993–1004.Google Scholar
Danzer, E, Thomas, NH, Thomas, A, et al. Long-term neurofunctional outcome, executive functioning, and behavioral adaptive skills following fetal myelomeningocele surgery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2016;214:269.e1–269.e8.Google Scholar
Al-Refai, A, Ryan, G, Van Mieghem, T. Maternal risks of fetal therapy. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2017;29:80–84.Google Scholar
Kabagambe, SK, Jensen, GW, Chen, YJ, et al. Fetal surgery for myelomeningocele: a systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes in fetoscopic versus open repair. Fetal Diagn Ther 2018;43:161–174.Google Scholar
Wilson, RD, Lemerand, K, Johnson, MP, et al. Reproductive outcomes in subsequent pregnancies after a pregnancy complicated by open maternal-fetal surgery (1996–2007). Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010;203:209.e1–209.e6.Google Scholar
Chatterjee, D, Arendt, KW, Moldenhauer, JS, et al. Anesthesia for maternal-fetal interventions: a consensus statement from the American Society of Anesthesiologists Committees on Obstetric and Pediatric Anesthesiology and the North American Fetal Therapy Network. Anesth Analg 2021;132:1164–1173.Google Scholar
Wood, CL, Zuk, J, Rollins, MD, et al. Anesthesia for maternal-fetal interventions: a survey of fetal therapy centers in the North American Fetal Therapy Network. Fetal Diagn Ther 2021;48:361–371.Google Scholar
Kacmar, RM, Gaiser, R. Physiologic changes of pregnancy. In Chestnut, DH, Wong, CA, Tsen, LC, et al. (Eds.), Chestnut’s Obstetric Anesthesia Principles and Practice (6th edn.). Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier, 2020:13–37.Google Scholar
Rychik, J. Fetal cardiovascular physiology. Pediatr Cardiol 2004;25:201–209.Google Scholar
Morris, JA, Hustead, RF, Robinson, RG, et al. Measurement of fetoplacental blood volume in the human previable fetus. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1974;118:927–934.Google Scholar
Leduc, L, Moise, KJ Jr., Carpenter, RJ Jr., et al. Fetoplacental blood volume estimation in pregnancies with Rh alloimmunization. Fetal Diagn Ther 1990;5: 138–146.Google Scholar
Colombatti, R, Sainati, L, Trevisanuto, D. Anemia and transfusion in the neonate. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med 2016;21:2–9.Google Scholar
Reverdiau-Moalic, P, Delahousse, B, Body, G, et al. Evolution of blood coagulation activators and inhibitors in the healthy human fetus. Blood 1996;88:900–906.Google Scholar
Sola-Visner, M. Platelets in the neonatal period: developmental differences in platelet production, function, and hemostasis and the potential impact of therapies. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program 2012;2012:506–511.Google Scholar
Ferschl, MB, Rollins, MD, Chatterjee, D. Error traps in anesthesia for fetal interventions. Paediatr Anaesth 2021;31:275–281.Google Scholar
Segura, LG, Arendt, KW, Sviggum, HP, et al. Spiral electrode for continuous fetal heart rate monitoring during in-utero myelomeningocele repair. Int J Obstet Anesth 2020;44:16–19.Google Scholar
Van de Velde, M, Jani, J, De Buck, F, et al. Fetal pain perception and pain management. Semin Fetal Neonatal Medi 2006;11:232–236.Google Scholar
Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Consult Series #59: The use of analgesia and anesthesia for maternal-fetal procedures. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2021;225:B2–B8.Google Scholar
Verriotis, M, Chang, P, Fitzgerald, M, et al. The development of the nociceptive brain. Neuroscience 2016;338:207–219.Google Scholar
Lee, SJ, Ralston, HJP, Drey, EA, et al. Fetal pain: a systematic multidisciplinary review of the evidence. JAMA 2005;294:947–954.Google Scholar
Van de Velde, M, De Buck, F. Fetal and maternal analgesia/anesthesia for fetal procedures. Fetal Diagn Ther 2012;31:201–209.Google Scholar
Torres, F, Anderson, C. The normal EEG of the human newborn. J Clin Neurophysiol 1985;2:89–104.Google Scholar
Slater, R, Worley, A, Fabrizi, L, et al. Evoked potentials generated by noxious stimulation in the human infant brain. Eur J Pain 2010;14:321–326.Google Scholar
Fisk, NM, Gitau, R, Teixeira, JM, et al. Effect of direct fetal opioid analgesia on fetal hormonal and hemodynamic stress response to intrauterine needling. Anesthesiology 2001;95:828–835.Google Scholar
White, MC, Wolf, AR. Pain and stress in the human fetus. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol 2004;18:205–220.Google Scholar
Van de Velde, M, Van Schoubroeck, D, Lewi, LE, et al. Remifentanil for fetal immobilization and maternal sedation during fetoscopic surgery: a randomized, double-blind comparison with diazepam. Anesth Analg 2005;101:251–258.Google Scholar
Boat, A, Mahmoud, M, Michelfelder, EC, et al. Supplementing desflurane with intravenous anesthesia reduces fetal cardiac dysfunction during open fetal surgery. Pediatr Anesth 2010;20:748–756.Google Scholar
Sinskey, JL, Rollins, MD, Whitlock, E, et al. Incidence and management of umbilical artery flow abnormalities during open fetal surgery. Fetal Diagn Ther 2017;43: 274–283.Google Scholar
Bleeser, T, Van Der Veeken, L, Fieuws, S, et al. Effects of general anaesthesia during pregnancy on neurocognitive development of the fetus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Anaesth 2021;126:1128–1140.Google Scholar
Ferschl, MB, Feiner, J, Vu, L, et al. A comparison of spinal anesthesia versus monitored anesthesia care with local anesthesia in minimally invasive fetal surgery. Anesth Analg 2020;130:409–415.Google Scholar
Patel, D, Adler, AC, Hassanpour, A, et al. Monitored anesthesia care versus general anesthesia for intrauterine fetal interventions: analysis of conversions and complications for 480 cases. Fetal Diagn Ther 2020;47: 597–603.Google Scholar
Hering, R, Hoeft, A, Putensen, C, et al. Maternal haemodynamics and lung water content during percutaneous fetoscopic interventions under general anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 2009;102:523–527.Google Scholar
Administration CoQMaD: American Society of Anesthesiologists. Standards and Guidelines. Continuum of Depth of Sedation: Definition of General Anesthesia and Levels of Sedation/Analgesia. 2014. Available from: www.asahq.org/standards-and-guidelines/continuum-of-depth-of-sedation-definition-of-general-anesthesia-and-levels-of-sedationanalgesia [last accessed October 4, 2022].Google Scholar
Marsh, BJ, Sinskey, J, Whitlock, EL, et al. Use of remifentanil for open in utero fetal myelomeningocele repair maintains uterine relaxation with reduced volatile anesthetic concentration. Fetal Diagn Ther 2020:47:810–816.Google Scholar
DiFederico, EM, Burlingame, JM, Kilpatrick, SJ, et al. Pulmonary edema in obstetric patients is rapidly resolved except in the presence of infection or of nitroglycerin tocolysis after open fetal surgery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998;179:925–933.Google Scholar
Rosen, MA, Andreae, MH, Cameron, GA. Nitroglycerin for fetal surgery: fetoscopy and ex utero intrapartum treatment procedure with malignant hyperthermia precautions. Anesth Analg 2003;96:698–700.Google Scholar
Rychik, J, Cohen, D, Tran, KM, et al. The role of echocardiography in the intraoperative management of the fetus undergoing myelomeningocele repair. Fetal Diagn Ther 2015;37:172–178.Google Scholar
Howley, L, Wood, C, Patel, SS, et al. Flow patterns in the ductus arteriosus during open fetal myelomeningocele repair. Prenat Diagn 2015;35:564–570.Google Scholar
Sinskey, JL, Rollins, MD, Whitlock, E, et al. Incidence and management of umbilical artery flow abnormalities during open fetal surgery. Fetal Diagn Ther 2018;43: 274–283.Google Scholar
Ferschl, M, Ball, R, Lee, H, et al. Anesthesia for in utero repair of myelomeningocele. Anesthesiology 2013;118:1211–1223.Google Scholar
Donepudi, R, Huynh, M, Moise, KJ, Jr et al. Early administration of magnesium sulfate during open fetal myelomeningocele repair reduces the dose of inhalational anesthesia. Fetal Diagn Ther 2019;45:192–196.Google Scholar
Hoagland, MA, Chatterjee, D. Anesthesia for fetal surgery. Paediatr Anaesth 2017;27: 346–357.Google Scholar
Kumar, K, Miron, C, Singh, SI. Maternal anesthesia for EXIT procedure: a systematic review of literature. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 2019;35:19–24.Google Scholar
Fink, RJ, Allen, TK, Habib, AS. Remifentanil for fetal immobilization and analgesia during the ex utero intrapartum treatment procedure under combined spinal–epidural anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 2011;106:851–855.Google Scholar
Rahbar, R, Vogel, A, Myers, LB, et al. Fetal surgery in otolaryngology: a new era in the diagnosis and management of fetal airway obstruction because of advances in prenatal imaging. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2005;131:393–398.Google Scholar
Panelli, DM, Phillips, CH, Brady, PC. Incidence, diagnosis and management of tubal and nontubal ectopic pregnancies: a review. Fertil Res Pract 2015;1:15.Google Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ Committee on Practice Bulletins. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 193: Tubal Ectopic Pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 2018;131:e91–e103.Google Scholar
Creanga, AA, Shapiro-Mendoza, CK, Bish, CL, et al. Trends in ectopic pregnancy mortality in the United States: 1980–2007. Obstet Gynecol 2011;117:837–843.Google Scholar
Hsu, JY, Chen, L, Gumer, AR, et al. Disparities in the management of ectopic pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2017;217:49e1–49 e10.Google Scholar
Tal, J, Haddad, S, Gordon, N, et al. Heterotopic pregnancy after ovulation induction and assisted reproductive technologies: a literature review from 1971 to 1993. Fertil Steril 1996;66:1–12.Google Scholar
Gulino, FA, Ettore, C, Ettore, G. A review on management of caesarean scar pregnancy. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2021;33:400–404.Google Scholar
Timor-Tritsch, IE, Monteagudo, A, Cali, G, et al. Cesarean scar pregnancy: patient counseling and management. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 2019;46:813–828.Google Scholar
Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Miller, R, Timor-Tritsch, IE, Gyamfi-Bannerman, C. Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM) Consult Series #49: Cesarean scar pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2020;222:B2–B14.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@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
×