MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3120695228 · doi:10.1002/uog.23588

Perinatal outcomes of iatrogenic chorioamniotic separation following fetoscopic surgery: systematic review and meta‐analysis

2021· review· en· W3120695228 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ahmed A. Nassr, Kamran Hessami, Sherif A. Shazly, Nazli Meshinchi, R. Corroënne, Jimmy Espinoza, Roopali Donepudi, Magdalena Sanz Cortés, Michael A. Belfort, Alireza A. Shamshirsaz

Bibliographic record

VenueUltrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFetoscopyMeta-analysisOdds ratioObstetricsGestational agePregnancyPrenatal diagnosisFetusInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To compare the perinatal outcomes between pregnancies with and those without iatrogenic chorioamniotic separation (iCAS) following fetoscopic intervention. METHODS: We performed a search in PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar from inception up to December 2020 for studies comparing perinatal outcomes between pregnancies that developed and those that did not develop iCAS after fetoscopic intervention for twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome (TTTS), open neural tube defect (ONTD) or congenital diaphragmatic hernia. A random-effects model was used to pool the mean differences (MD) or odds ratios (OR) and the corresponding 95% CI. The primary outcome was neonatal survival. Secondary outcomes included gestational age (GA) at intervention and at delivery, interval from intervention to delivery and incidence of preterm prelabor rupture of membranes (PPROM) and preterm delivery. The methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. RESULTS: The search identified 348 records, of which seven studies (six on fetoscopic laser photocoagulation (FLP) for TTTS and one on fetoscopic repair for ONTD) assessed the perinatal outcomes of pregnancies that developed iCAS after fetoscopic intervention. Given that only one study reported on fetoscopic ONTD repair, the meta-analysis was limited to TTTS pregnancies and included six studies (total of 1881 pregnancies). Pregnancies that developed iCAS after FLP for TTTS, compared with those that did not, had significantly lower GA at the time of intervention (weeks) (MD, -1.07 (95% CI, -1.89 to -0.24); P = 0.01) and at delivery (weeks) (MD, -1.74 (95% CI, -3.13 to -0.34); P = 0.01) and significantly lower neonatal survival (OR, 0.41 (95% CI, 0.24-0.70); P = 0.001). In addition, development of iCAS after FLP for TTTS increased significantly the risk for PPROM < 34 weeks' gestation (OR, 3.98 (95% CI, 1.76-9.03); P < 0.001) and preterm delivery < 32 weeks (OR, 1.80 (95% CI, 1.16-2.80); P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: iCAS is a common complication after FLP for TTTS. In patients undergoing FLP for TTTS, iCAS develops more often with earlier GA at intervention and is associated with earlier GA at delivery, higher risk of PPROM < 34 weeks' gestation and preterm delivery < 32 weeks and lower neonatal survival. Given the limitations of this meta-analysis and lack of literature reporting on other types of fetoscopic intervention, the presented findings should be interpreted with caution and should not be generalized to fetoscopic procedures used to treat other fetal conditions. © 2021 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.052
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.780
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.052
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.309 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUltrasound in Obstetrics and GynecologySame topicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin PregnancyFrench-language works237,207