Twin-to-Twin Transfusion Syndrome: Definition, Staging, and Ultrasound Assessment

Objective: The purpose of this article is to review the definition of twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome (TTTS) and the sonographic diagnostic assessment of these cases prior to therapy.

Materials and Methods: The article addresses the terminology used to refer to the condition and describes the systematic ultrasound assessment of the condition, including the ultrasound diagnosis, the staging of the disease, cervical assessment and pre-operative mapping.

Results: From an etymologic and medical point of view, the term ‘fetofetal transfusion’ is more appropriate than ‘TTTS’. However, as the latter, and its attendant acronym TTTS, have been widely adopted in the English language, it is impractical to change at this point. TTTS is defined sonographically in the combined presence of a maximum vertical pocket (MVP) of 8 cm or greater in one sac and 2 cm or less in the other sac, regardless of the gestational age at diagnosis. Staging of the condition using the Quintero staging system is practical, reproducible, and accepted. Transvaginal cervical length assessment should be an integral part of the ultrasound evaluation. Pre-operative mapping to anticipate the location of the placental vascular anastomoses and avoid injuring the dividing membrane is also discussed.

Conclusions: The term ‘TTTS’ can continue to be used in the English medical literature. The condition can be diagnosed and assessed following a systematic ultrasound methodology. The use of such ultrasound methodology breaks the examination into a distinct set of components, assuring a comprehensive examination and proper communication among caregivers.

Ultrasound in twin pregnancies

OBJECTIVE

To review the literature with respect to the use of diagnostic ultrasound in the management of twin pregnancies. To make recommendations for the best use of ultrasound in twin pregnancies.

OUTCOMES

Reduction in perinatal mortality and morbidity and short- and long-term neonatal morbidity in twin pregnancies. Optimization of ultrasound use in twin pregnancies.

EVIDENCE

Published literature was retrieved through searches of PubMed and the Cochrane Library in 2008 and 2009 using appropriate controlled vocabulary (e.g., twin, ultrasound, cervix, prematurity) and key words (e.g., acardiac, twin, reversed arterial perfusion, twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome, amniotic fluid). Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized control trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies. There were no date restrictions. Studies were restricted to those with available English or French abstracts or text. Searches were updated on a regular basis and incorporated into the guideline to September 2009. Grey (unpublished) literature was identified through searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology assessment-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, and national and international medical specialty societies.

VALUES

The evidence collected was reviewed by the Diagnostic Imaging Committee of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada, with input from members of the Maternal Fetal Medicine Committee and the Genetics Committee of the SOGC. The recommendations were made according to the guidelines developed by The Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (Table 1).

BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS

The benefit expected from this guideline is facilitation and optimization of the use of ultrasound in twin pregnancy. SUMMARY STATEMENTS: 1. There are insufficient data to make recommendations on repeat anatomical assessments in twin pregnancies. Therefore, a complete anatomical survey at each scan may not be needed following a complete and normal assessment. (III) 2. There are insufficient data to recommend a routine preterm labour surveillance protocol in terms of frequency, timing, and optimal cervical length thresholds. (II-2) 3. Singleton growth curves currently provide the best predictors of adverse outcome in twins and may be used for evaluating growth abnormalities. (III) 4. It is suggested that growth discordance be defined using either a difference (20 mm) in absolute measurement in abdominal circumference or a difference of 20% in ultrasound-derived estimated fetal weight. (II-2) 5. Although there is insufficient evidence to recommend a specific schedule for ultrasound assessment of twin gestation, most experts recommend serial ultrasound assessment every 2 to 3 weeks, starting at 16 weeks of gestation for monochorionic pregnancies and every 3 to 4 weeks, starting from the anatomy scan (18 to 22 weeks) for dichorionic pregnancies. (II-1) 6. Umbilical artery Doppler may be useful in the surveillance of twin gestations when there are complications involving the placental circulation or fetal hemodynamic physiology. (II-2) 7. Although many methods of evaluating the level of amniotic fluid in twins (deepest vertical pocket, single pocket, amniotic fluid index) have been described, there is not enough evidence to suggest that one method is more predictive than the others of adverse pregnancy outcome. (II-3) 8. Referral to an appropriate high-risk pregnancy centre is indicated when complications unique to twins are suspected on ultrasound. (II-2) These complications include: 1. Twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome 2. Monoamniotic twins gestation 3. Conjoined twins 4. Twin reversed arterial perfusion sequence 5. Single fetal death in the second or third trimester 6. Growth discordance in monochorionic twins. Recommendations 1. All patients who are suspected to have a twin pregnancy on first trimester physical examination or who are at risk (e.g., pregnancies resulting from assisted reproductive technologies) should have first trimester ultrasound performed. (II-2A) 2. Every attempt should be made to determine and report amnionicity and chorionicity when a twin pregnancy is identified. (II-2A) 3. Although the accuracy in confirmation of gestational age at the first and second trimester is comparable, dating should be done with first trimester ultrasound. (II-2A) 4. Beyond the first trimester, it is suggested that a combination of parameters rather than a single parameter should be used to confirm gestational age. (II-2C) 5. When twin pregnancy is the result of in vitro fertilization, accurate determination of gestational age should be made from the date of embryo transfer. (II-1A) 6. There is insufficient evidence to make a recommendation of which fetus (when discordant for size) to use to date a twin pregnancy. However, to avoid missing a situation of early intrauterine growth restriction in one twin, most experts agree that the clinician may consider dating pregnancy using the larger fetus. (III-C) 7. In twin pregnancies, aneuploidy screening using nuchal transluscency measurements should be offered. (II-2B) 8. Detailed ultrasound examination to screen for fetal anomalies should be offered, preferably between 18 and 22 weeks' gestation, in all twin pregnancies. (II-2B) 9. When ultrasound is used to screen for preterm birth in a twin gestation, endovaginal ultrasound measurement of the cervical length should be performed. (II-2A) 10. Increased fetal surveillance should be considered when there is either growth restriction diagnosed in one twin or significant growth discordance. (II-2A) 11. Umbilical artery Doppler should not be routinely offered in uncomplicated twin pregnancies. (I-E) 12. For defining oligohydramnios and polyhydramnios, the ultrasonographer should use the deepest vertical pocket in either sac: oligohydramnios when < 2 cm and polyhydramnios when > 8 cm. (II-2B).

Discordant growth in twins

Discordant growth in twins contributes significantly to rates of perinatal morbidity and mortality. These rates vary according to chorionicity, timing of onset and severity. We have reviewed English language literature in Medline since 1980. It is clear that diagnosis of discordant growth has improved due to the use of serial ultrasound examination. Following the detection of differences in fetal size, diagnosis is facilitated by umbilical artery and fetal Doppler studies. Management options vary according to chorionicity, timing of onset and umbilical-fetal Doppler studies. The mode of delivery in discordant twins remains controversial. We conclude that ultrasound surveillance of twin gestations, combining serial biometry and selective Doppler studies, is effective in the recognition of significant intrauterine growth restriction in co-twins. Differences in etiology and management underscore the importance of establishing chorionicity routinely as soon as twin gestation is diagnosed.

Antepartum evaluation of monochorionic diamniotic (MD) twins; MD-twin score: a new scoring method for perinatal outcome

OBJECTIVE

Our purpose was to establish a new scoring method to survey monochorionic diamniotic (MD) twins during antepartum periods.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective study was performed regarding MD twins delivered between January 1992 and July 1996. Maternal and neonatal records were assessed for the following 5 perinatal variables; birth-weight discordance, amniotic-fluid discordance, hydrops fetalis, umbilical-cord insertion, and fetal-heart-rate monitoring. Each variable was coded as normal or abnormal and then assigned an arbitrary weight of 0 if normal and 1 if abnormal, yielding a range of scores from 0 (all normal) to 5 (all abnormal). The relationships between individual variables and their combinations and the outcome of pregnancy was determined. A poor pregnancy outcome consisted of intrauterine death, neonatal death, or neurological sequelae of at least one twin. The 5-variable combination was termed as the MD-twin score. A chi-square test and logistic regression analysis were used to determine statistical significance.

RESULTS

There were 59 MD pregnancies, of which 13 pregnancies resulted in a poor outcome. The single variable that most likely contributed to a poor outcome was amniotic-fluid discordance. All 35 pregnancies with an MD-twin score of < or = 2 had a good outcome. There were 14 pregnancies with a score of 3, and 21% of them had a poor outcome. All of the pregnancies with a score of > or = 4 had a poor outcome. When we chose the MD-twin score of 3 as the critical point for a poor outcome, the likelihood ratio statistics became the highest of any single variable or any combination of variables.

CONCLUSION

The MD-twin score predicted poor outcomes better than did any single variable or combination of variables.