We aimed to investigate whether the alterations of time intervals and velocity–time integrals (VTIs) of ductus venosus (DV) Doppler flow could predict evolving twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome (TTTS) in monochorionic diamniotic (MD) twin pregnancies in the second trimester. DV Doppler waveforms of MD twin pregnancies were retrospectively analyzed. Time intervals and VTIs of the accelerating phase of S-wave (S1 and VTI-1), decelerating phase of S-wave (S2 and VTI-2) and phase of D-wave (D and VTI-diast) were measured in the recipient twins of TTTS and the larger twins of uncomplicated MD twins. Each parameter was normalized to total time intervals and VTIs. DV parameters of prerecipient twins in pre-TTTS conditions were analyzed. The pre-TTTS condition was defined as the condition within 2 weeks before when TTTS cases fulfilled the criteria. Both recipient twins in TTTS cases and prerecipient twins in pre-TTTS condition showed significantly shorter S1, longer S2, shorter D, smaller VTI-1, larger VTI-2 and smaller VTI-diast than did the larger twins in uncomplicated MD twins (p < .05). Receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis showed that VTI-2 had better performance, and VTI-2 >45.5% had 87.0% sensitivity, 90.9% specificity, 81.0% positive predictive value and 93.0% negative predictive value for detecting prerecipient twins. Recipient twins complicated with TTTS have characteristic alterations in time intervals and VTIs of DV Doppler flow, which is present even before fulfilling the TTTS criteria. Furthermore, VTI-2 >45.5% is a possible predictive parameter for TTTS in the second trimester.

Monochorionic twin pregnancies can be complicated by twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome (TTTS). The best treatment option for TTTS is fetoscopic laser coagulation of the vascular anastomoses between donor and recipient. After laser therapy, up to 33% residual anastomoses were seen. These residual anastomoses can cause twin anemia polycythemia sequence (TAPS) and recurrent TTTS. In order to reduce the number of residual anastomoses and their complications, a new technique, the Solomon technique, where the whole vascular equator will be coagulated, was introduced. The Solomon technique showed a reduction of recurrent TTS compared to the selective technique. The incidence of recurrent TTTS after the Solomon technique ranged from 0% to 3.9% compared to 5.3–8.5% after the selective technique. The incidence of TAPS after the Solomon technique ranged from 0% to 2.9% compared to 4.2–15.6% after the selective technique. The Solomon technique may improve dual survival rates ranging from 64% to 85% compared to 46–76% for the selective technique. There was no difference reported in procedure-related complications such as intrauterine infection and preterm premature rupture of membranes. The Solomon technique significantly reduced the incidence of TAPS and recurrent TTTS and may improve survival and neonatal outcome, without identifiable adverse outcome or complications; therefore, the Solomon technique is recommended for the treatment of TTTS.

Objective: Laser ablation of all placental vascular anastomoses is the optimal treatment for twin–twin transfusion syndrome (TTTS). However, two important controversies are apparent in the literature: (a) a gap between concept and performance, and (b) controversy regarding whether all the anastomoses can be identified endoscopically and whether blind lasering of healthy placenta is justified. The purpose of this article is: (a) to address the potential source of the gap between concept and performance by analyzing the fundamental steps needed to successfully accomplish the surgery, and (b) to discuss the resulting competency benchmarks reported with the different surgical techniques. Materials and Methods: Laser surgery for TTTS can be broken down into two fundamental steps: (1) endoscopic identification of the placental vascular anastomoses, (2) laser ablation of the anastomoses. The two steps are not synonymous: (a) regarding the endoscopic identification of the anastomoses, the non-selective technique is based upon lasering all vessels crossing the dividing membrane, whether anastomotic or not. The selective technique identifies and lasers only placental vascular anastomoses. The Solomon technique is based on the theory that not all anastomoses are endoscopically visible and thus involves lasering healthy areas of the placenta between lasered anastomoses, (b) regarding the actual laser ablation of the anastomoses, successful completion of the surgery (i.e., lasering all the anastomoses) can be measured by the rate of persistent or reverse TTTS (PRTTTS) and how often a selective technique can be achieved. Articles representing the different techniques are discussed. Results: The non-selective technique is associated with the lowest double survival rate (35%), compared with 60–75% of the Solomon or the Quintero selective techniques. The Solomon technique is associated with a 20% rate of residual patent placental vascular anastomoses, compared to 3.5–5% for the selective technique (p < .05). Both the Solomon and the selective technique are associated with a 1% risk of PRTTTS. Adequate placental assessment is highest with the selective technique (99%) compared with the Solomon (80%) or the ‘standard’ (60%) techniques (p < .05). A surgical performance index is proposed. Conclusion: The Quintero selective technique was associated with the highest rate of successful ablation and lowest rate of PRTTTS. The Solomon technique represents a historical backward movement in the identification of placental vascular anastomoses and is associated with higher rate of residual patent vascular communications. The reported outcomes of the Quintero selective technique do not lend support to the existence of invisible anastomoses or justify lasering healthy placental tissue.

Objectives: The natural history of stage 1 Twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome (TTTS) remains unclear and its optimal management is yet to be established. The main aims of this meta-analysis were to quantify the incidence of progression in stage 1 TTTS and to ascertain survival in these pregnancies.

Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library were searched. Reference lists within each article were hand-searched for additional reports. The outcomes included incidence of progression and survival in stage 1 TTTS. Randomized controlled trials, cohort and case-control studies were included. Case reports, studies including three or fewer cases of stage 1 TTTS, and editorials were excluded. Proportion meta-analysis was used for analysis (Registration number: CRD42016036190).

Results: The search yielded 3,085 citations; 18 studies were included in the review (172 pregnancies to assess progression and 433 pregnancies to assess the survival). The pooled incidence of progression in stage 1 TTTS was 27% [95% CI 16–39%]. The pooled overall survival, double survival and at least one survival in the pregnancies managed expectantly were 79% [95% CI 62–92%], 70% [95% CI 54–84%] and 87% [95% CI 69–98%], respectively. In those undergoing amnioreduction, the corresponding figures were 77% [95% CI 68–85%], 67% [95% CI 57–76%] and 86% [95% CI 76–94%], respectively. The survival rates were 68% [95% CI 54–81%], 54% [95% CI 36–72%], and 81% [95% CI 69–90%], when laser surgery was performed.

Conclusions: The optimal initial management of stage 1 TTTS remains in equipoise. The ongoing randomized trial comparing immediate laser surgery versus conservative management should provide a definitive answer.

Twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome (TTTS) and twin anemia polycythemia sequence (TAPS) are complications unique to monochorionic twin pregnancies and their shared circulation. Both are the result of the transfusion imbalance in the intertwin circulation. TTTS is characterized by an amniotic fluid discordance, whereas in TAPS, there is a severe discordance in hemoglobin levels. The article gives an overview of the typical features of TTTS and TAPS placentas.

Fetoscopic surgery is widely accepted as the preferred first-line treatment for twin–twin transfusion syndrome (TTTS). Nonetheless, the broad diffusion of this technique relies on a single multicentric-randomized trial. We hereby question this trial in a post-hoc Bayesian analysis, submitting its results to several scenarios comprising the alternative published non-randomized literature and pessimistic opinions regarding this surgery. Furthermore, we also discuss further refinements in indications, questioning potential alternatives in early stages of the disease.