What to do when the second twin is non-vertex?

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Katrine Vasehus Schou, Marianne Johansen
{"title":"What to do when the second twin is non-vertex?","authors":"Katrine Vasehus Schou,&nbsp;Marianne Johansen","doi":"10.1111/aogs.15067","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The incidence of twin deliveries is still increasing in many countries, as a consequence of higher maternal age, and assisted reproduction technology. The choice of planned mode of delivery in twin gestations and intrapartum clinical management are still debated with many discrepancies between countries and centers.</p><p>A lot of factors influence the physician's recommendation for mode of delivery in a twin gestation. In high income countries there seems to be consensus that vaginal delivery is a reasonable and likely the preferred option for delivery in near term uncomplicated twin pregnancies with the first twin in a vertex presentation.<span><sup>1, 2</sup></span> For many years it has been assumed that trial of labor (TOL) with the second twin being in a non-vertex presentation is associated with a higher maternal and neonatal risk, including an increased risk of combined delivery, and hence maternal and neonatal morbidity. However, more recent research has identified other independent risk factors such as higher gestational age, nulliparity, and the use of medical induction of labor. Several studies have now confirmed that TOL in twin pregnancies is a safe option, irrespective of second twin presentation if certain well-defined criteria are met, including a recent ultrasound regarding fetal position and estimated fetal weight focusing on weight con- or dis-cordance, and with the appropriate infrastructure and clinical expertise being accessible on labor ward. A sub-analysis of The Twin Birth Study, however, found that transverse/oblique lie of twin B after the birth of twin A was a risk factor for combined delivery and combined delivery a risk factor for adverse neonatal outcome.<span><sup>1</sup></span> In this context it is important to remember that the majority of second twins present in a vertex position and that up to one tenth of second twins in non-vertex presentation experience a spontaneous version during labor affecting the likelihood of successful vaginal delivery.<span><sup>3</sup></span> Still, up to 4% of women opting for vaginal twin delivery ends up with “the worst of two worlds” going through a combined delivery with the burden of undergoing a vaginal delivery followed by an emergency cesarean section with its inborn risks. When choosing the most appropriate mode of delivery, this potential scenario of combined delivery seems to affect women's choice.</p><p>Almost 9 out of 10 second twins starting labor in a non-vertex presentation (approximately one third of all twins) end up in a final non-vertex presentation and may challenge the attending obstetrician with a decision on how to deliver. In some centers the clinicians choose to perform an intrapartum external version (external cephalic version [ECV]) or correction of fetal position of the non-vertex second twin, to achieve a vertex presentation, whilst others opt for either spontaneous breech delivery or breech extraction, whichever comes most natural, in order to achieve a safe vaginal delivery. Some centers, again, may opt for cesarean delivery of the second twin when in a non-vertex position. Furthermore, internal podalic version of the second twin before breech extraction is used as an option with vertex, oblique, or transverse presentation of the second twin; especially when urgent delivery is required. The lack of experience in breech deliveries, in general, may influence the clinician's choice of mode of delivery of the second twin in a final non-vertex presentation. There is also some resistance or fear to perform intrauterine maneuvers amongst obstetricians, which may also affect the decision on delivery mode. Another factor that may influence the choice is chorionicity as monochorionic twins need shorter intertwin birth interval due to the small risk of intrapartum transfusion syndrome.</p><p>In this edition of <i>AOGS</i>, Dymon et al.<span><sup>4</sup></span> presents a systematic review on intrapartum ECV of the second twin when presenting in a final non-vertex presentation by analyzing success rate and adverse outcomes in terms of neonatal death, major birth trauma, or Apgar score &lt;7 at 5 min. Ten studies of older date (1983–1998) are included in the study and the overall success rate for ECVs is 64.4% (<i>n</i> = 289 attempts) with success rates varying between 42% and 80%. Nine out of ten of successful ECVs ended up in vaginal birth. Approximately half of the unsuccessful ECVs gave vaginal birth to the second twin in a breech presentation, whereas the other half of the failed attempts of ECV were delivered by cesarean section. This systematic review has many limitations, especially due to its retrospective and historic nature, as well as scarce, low-quality data from the available studies included. Based on this systematic review it is therefore difficult to draw meaningful and evidence-based conclusions on efficacy and safety of the use of intrapartum ECV as a clinical management maneuver for the non-vertex second twin. Furthermore, the study does not address the outcome of the spontaneous breech deliveries of the second twin in order to discuss the pros and cons for trial of ECV, nor is the indication for cesarean section in failed ECVs discussed, and it remains unclear whether vertex presentation of the second twin would have made a difference. However, the study findings do suggest that intrapartum ECV of the second twin with a final non-vertex presentation may have a role to play as an integral part of the toolbox for clinical management of the final non-vertex presenting second twin. More studies, preferably prospective and ideally of randomized controlled trial (RCT)-design, are needed to qualify the full picture of optimal management of TOL for twin deliveries with the second twin being in a final non-vertex presentation. RCTs are, however, not easy to conduct in complex clinical scenarios like a twin delivery. For now, we, as obstetricians, must remain clinically updated, and trained in intra- and extrauterine maneuvers to be prepared for every possible clinical scenario of a vaginal twin delivery with a toolbox consisting of all the above-mentioned maneuvers including the ECV of a non-vertex presenting second twin.</p><p>Simulation based clinical skills training of vaginal twin delivery for healthcare professionals at the labor wards, could be beneficial to prepare for all possible scenarios that may arise in real-life. This method may effectively complement clinical experience, helping clinicians develop, and maintain the expertise necessary to safely manage twin vaginal deliveries.</p>","PeriodicalId":6990,"journal":{"name":"Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica","volume":"104 4","pages":"582-583"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/aogs.15067","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aogs.15067","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The incidence of twin deliveries is still increasing in many countries, as a consequence of higher maternal age, and assisted reproduction technology. The choice of planned mode of delivery in twin gestations and intrapartum clinical management are still debated with many discrepancies between countries and centers.

A lot of factors influence the physician's recommendation for mode of delivery in a twin gestation. In high income countries there seems to be consensus that vaginal delivery is a reasonable and likely the preferred option for delivery in near term uncomplicated twin pregnancies with the first twin in a vertex presentation.1, 2 For many years it has been assumed that trial of labor (TOL) with the second twin being in a non-vertex presentation is associated with a higher maternal and neonatal risk, including an increased risk of combined delivery, and hence maternal and neonatal morbidity. However, more recent research has identified other independent risk factors such as higher gestational age, nulliparity, and the use of medical induction of labor. Several studies have now confirmed that TOL in twin pregnancies is a safe option, irrespective of second twin presentation if certain well-defined criteria are met, including a recent ultrasound regarding fetal position and estimated fetal weight focusing on weight con- or dis-cordance, and with the appropriate infrastructure and clinical expertise being accessible on labor ward. A sub-analysis of The Twin Birth Study, however, found that transverse/oblique lie of twin B after the birth of twin A was a risk factor for combined delivery and combined delivery a risk factor for adverse neonatal outcome.1 In this context it is important to remember that the majority of second twins present in a vertex position and that up to one tenth of second twins in non-vertex presentation experience a spontaneous version during labor affecting the likelihood of successful vaginal delivery.3 Still, up to 4% of women opting for vaginal twin delivery ends up with “the worst of two worlds” going through a combined delivery with the burden of undergoing a vaginal delivery followed by an emergency cesarean section with its inborn risks. When choosing the most appropriate mode of delivery, this potential scenario of combined delivery seems to affect women's choice.

Almost 9 out of 10 second twins starting labor in a non-vertex presentation (approximately one third of all twins) end up in a final non-vertex presentation and may challenge the attending obstetrician with a decision on how to deliver. In some centers the clinicians choose to perform an intrapartum external version (external cephalic version [ECV]) or correction of fetal position of the non-vertex second twin, to achieve a vertex presentation, whilst others opt for either spontaneous breech delivery or breech extraction, whichever comes most natural, in order to achieve a safe vaginal delivery. Some centers, again, may opt for cesarean delivery of the second twin when in a non-vertex position. Furthermore, internal podalic version of the second twin before breech extraction is used as an option with vertex, oblique, or transverse presentation of the second twin; especially when urgent delivery is required. The lack of experience in breech deliveries, in general, may influence the clinician's choice of mode of delivery of the second twin in a final non-vertex presentation. There is also some resistance or fear to perform intrauterine maneuvers amongst obstetricians, which may also affect the decision on delivery mode. Another factor that may influence the choice is chorionicity as monochorionic twins need shorter intertwin birth interval due to the small risk of intrapartum transfusion syndrome.

In this edition of AOGS, Dymon et al.4 presents a systematic review on intrapartum ECV of the second twin when presenting in a final non-vertex presentation by analyzing success rate and adverse outcomes in terms of neonatal death, major birth trauma, or Apgar score <7 at 5 min. Ten studies of older date (1983–1998) are included in the study and the overall success rate for ECVs is 64.4% (n = 289 attempts) with success rates varying between 42% and 80%. Nine out of ten of successful ECVs ended up in vaginal birth. Approximately half of the unsuccessful ECVs gave vaginal birth to the second twin in a breech presentation, whereas the other half of the failed attempts of ECV were delivered by cesarean section. This systematic review has many limitations, especially due to its retrospective and historic nature, as well as scarce, low-quality data from the available studies included. Based on this systematic review it is therefore difficult to draw meaningful and evidence-based conclusions on efficacy and safety of the use of intrapartum ECV as a clinical management maneuver for the non-vertex second twin. Furthermore, the study does not address the outcome of the spontaneous breech deliveries of the second twin in order to discuss the pros and cons for trial of ECV, nor is the indication for cesarean section in failed ECVs discussed, and it remains unclear whether vertex presentation of the second twin would have made a difference. However, the study findings do suggest that intrapartum ECV of the second twin with a final non-vertex presentation may have a role to play as an integral part of the toolbox for clinical management of the final non-vertex presenting second twin. More studies, preferably prospective and ideally of randomized controlled trial (RCT)-design, are needed to qualify the full picture of optimal management of TOL for twin deliveries with the second twin being in a final non-vertex presentation. RCTs are, however, not easy to conduct in complex clinical scenarios like a twin delivery. For now, we, as obstetricians, must remain clinically updated, and trained in intra- and extrauterine maneuvers to be prepared for every possible clinical scenario of a vaginal twin delivery with a toolbox consisting of all the above-mentioned maneuvers including the ECV of a non-vertex presenting second twin.

Simulation based clinical skills training of vaginal twin delivery for healthcare professionals at the labor wards, could be beneficial to prepare for all possible scenarios that may arise in real-life. This method may effectively complement clinical experience, helping clinicians develop, and maintain the expertise necessary to safely manage twin vaginal deliveries.

当第二个双胞胎不是顶点时该怎么办?
在许多国家,由于产妇年龄增加和辅助生殖技术,双胞胎分娩的发生率仍在增加。双胎妊娠中计划分娩方式的选择和产时临床管理仍存在争议,国家和中心之间存在许多差异。很多因素影响医生对双胎妊娠分娩方式的建议。在高收入国家,人们似乎一致认为阴道分娩是合理的,并且可能是近期无并发症的双胎妊娠中首选的分娩方式,其中第一胎为顶点分娩。1,2多年来,人们一直认为,分娩试验(TOL)中第二个双胞胎处于非顶点呈现与更高的孕产妇和新生儿风险相关,包括联合分娩风险增加,因此孕产妇和新生儿发病率增加。然而,最近的研究已经确定了其他独立的风险因素,如胎龄较大、无产和使用药物引产。现在有几项研究已经证实,如果符合某些明确的标准,包括最近一次关于胎儿位置的超声检查和估计的胎儿体重,重点是体重一致或不一致,并且在产房有适当的基础设施和临床专业知识,无论第二胎是否出现,TOL在双胎妊娠中是一种安全的选择。然而,双胞胎出生研究的一项亚分析发现,双胞胎A出生后双胞胎B的横卧/斜卧是联合分娩的危险因素,联合分娩是新生儿不良结局的危险因素在这种情况下,重要的是要记住,大多数第二胎是在顶点位置出现的,而在非顶点位置出现的第二胎中,有十分之一的人在分娩过程中经历了自然版本,影响了阴道分娩成功的可能性尽管如此,高达4%的选择阴道分娩的女性最终以“两个世界中最糟糕的”方式结束,她们要经历一次联合分娩,先是阴道分娩,然后是紧急剖宫产,还有先天的风险。在选择最合适的分娩方式时,这种联合分娩的潜在情况似乎会影响妇女的选择。几乎十分之九的双胞胎以非顶点表现开始分娩(约占所有双胞胎的三分之一),最终以非顶点表现结束,这可能会对主治产科医生决定如何分娩提出质疑。在一些中心,临床医生选择进行产时外部版本(外部头侧版本[ECV])或纠正非顶点第二胎的胎儿位置,以实现顶点呈现,而其他选择自然臀位分娩或臀位取出,无论哪种方式最自然,以实现安全的阴道分娩。一些中心,再次,可能会选择剖宫产第二个双胞胎时,在非顶点位置。此外,在臀位取出前,第二胎的内跖面可作为第二胎顶点、斜位或横向呈现的选择;特别是需要紧急交货的时候。一般来说,缺乏臀位分娩的经验可能会影响临床医生在最后的非顶点分娩中选择第二个双胞胎的分娩方式。在产科医生中,也存在一些对宫内操作的抵制或恐惧,这也可能影响分娩方式的决定。另一个可能影响选择的因素是绒毛膜性,因为单绒毛膜双胞胎需要更短的双胞胎出生间隔,因为分娩时输血综合征的风险较小。在AOGS的这一版中,Dymon等人4通过分析新生儿死亡、重大出生创伤或5分钟Apgar评分[lt;7]方面的成功率和不良后果,对最后非顶点呈现的第二个双胞胎的产时ECV进行了系统回顾。该研究纳入了10项较早的研究(1983-1998),ecv的总体成功率为64.4% (n = 289次尝试),成功率在42%至80%之间变化。十分之九成功的体外受精最终是顺产。大约一半不成功的ECV在臀位分娩时阴道分娩了第二个双胞胎,而另一半ECV失败的尝试则通过剖宫产分娩。该系统综述有许多局限性,特别是由于其回顾性和历史性质,以及来自现有研究的稀缺和低质量数据。因此,基于这一系统综述,很难得出有意义的和基于证据的结论,即使用产中ECV作为非顶点二胎的临床管理策略的有效性和安全性。 此外,为了讨论ECV试验的利弊,该研究没有讨论第二个双胞胎自然臀位分娩的结果,也没有讨论失败ECV的剖宫产指征,并且尚不清楚第二个双胞胎的顶点呈现是否会产生差异。然而,研究结果确实表明,最终无顶点表现的第二个双胞胎的产时ECV可能作为最终无顶点表现的第二个双胞胎临床管理工具箱的一个组成部分发挥作用。需要更多的研究,最好是前瞻性和理想的随机对照试验(RCT)设计,以确定双胞胎分娩时TOL的最佳管理的全图,其中第二个双胞胎处于最终的非顶点表现。然而,在像双胞胎分娩这样复杂的临床情况下,随机对照试验并不容易进行。目前,作为产科医生,我们必须保持临床更新,并接受宫内和宫外操作的培训,为阴道分娩的每一种可能的临床情况做好准备,包括上述所有操作的工具箱,包括非顶点出现的第二胎的ECV。针对产房医护人员的阴道双胎分娩模拟临床技能培训,可能有助于为现实生活中可能出现的所有可能情况做好准备。这种方法可以有效地补充临床经验,帮助临床医生发展和维持安全管理双阴道分娩所需的专业知识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
4.70%
发文量
180
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Published monthly, Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica is an international journal dedicated to providing the very latest information on the results of both clinical, basic and translational research work related to all aspects of women’s health from around the globe. The journal regularly publishes commentaries, reviews, and original articles on a wide variety of topics including: gynecology, pregnancy, birth, female urology, gynecologic oncology, fertility and reproductive biology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信