MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411183681 · doi:10.1002/uog.29240

Benefits and complications of fetal and postnatal surgery for open spina bifida: systematic review and proportional meta‐analysis

2025· review· en· W4411183681 on OpenAlexaff
Yada Kunpalin, Vesna Sokol Karadjole, E. S. B. Medeiros, Marta Domínguez-Moreno, Joanna Sichitiu, Nimrah Abbasi, G. Ryan, Shiri Shinar, John W. Snelgrove, Abhaya V. Kulkarni, Tim Van Mieghem

Bibliographic record

VenueUltrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Dysraphism and Malformations
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenCentre for Social InnovationUniversity of TorontoSickKids FoundationMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpina bifidaMeta-analysisMedicineFetusFetal surgerySurgeryPediatricsPregnancyInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To derive pooled estimates of maternal, fetal and pediatric outcomes up to the age of 30 months in patients undergoing pre- or postnatal surgery for open spina bifida (OSB). METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, PubMed (non-MEDLINE records), Embase, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, as well as 'gray' literature, for studies reporting on maternal, fetal and/or pediatric outcomes related to pre- or postnatal surgery for OSB. Only studies with inclusion criteria similar to those of the Management of Myelomeningocele Study were included. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed. Meta-analysis of single proportions was performed. RESULTS: No case of maternal death was reported following prenatal surgery for OSB. Common maternal complications among those who underwent prenatal surgery included preterm prelabor rupture of membranes (open classical hysterotomy, 31%; open minihysterotomy, 33%; hybrid fetoscopy, 32%; percutaneous fetoscopy, 80%) and preterm birth before 32 weeks' gestation (open classical hysterotomy, 12%; open minihysterotomy, 15%; hybrid fetoscopy, 13%; percutaneous fetoscopy, 33%). Among patients who underwent open classical hysterotomy for OSB and later became pregnant again, 4% and 9% experienced placenta accreta spectrum disorder and uterine rupture, respectively, in any subsequent pregnancy. The most common neonatal complications were respiratory distress syndrome, apnea and postnatal surgical wound revision. Perinatal and infant death rates were similar regardless of whether the surgery was performed pre- or postnatally. The rate of cerebrospinal fluid diversion surgery at 12 months after birth was lower following prenatal surgery (open classical hysterotomy, 38%; open minihysterotomy, 17%; hybrid fetoscopy, 36%; percutaneous fetoscopy, 46%) compared with postnatal surgery (81%). The proportion of toddlers walking with or without assistive devices at 30 months after birth was higher in some prenatal surgery groups (open classical hysterotomy, 72%; open minihysterotomy, 66%; percutaneous fetoscopy, 81%) compared with the postnatal repair group (57%). The rate of clean intermittent catheterization for bladder management at 30 months after birth was 39% in the open classical hysterotomy group and 41% in the percutaneous fetoscopy group, compared with 53% in the postnatal surgery group. Each surgical approach was associated with a specific constellation of procedure-related complications. CONCLUSIONS: We provide pooled estimates for maternal, fetal and pediatric outcomes for all currently used perinatal surgical approaches for OSB repair, each of which has its specific advantages and disadvantages. Our data should serve to inform clinical decision analysis to identify the best surgical approach for OSB cases. © 2025 The Author(s). Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of 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)0.018
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUltrasound in Obstetrics and GynecologySame topicSpinal Dysraphism and MalformationsFrench-language works237,207