Selective Fetal Growth Restriction Type III

Abstract

Objectives Per a recent expert definition, diagnosis of selective fetal growth restriction (sFGR) in monochorionic diamniotic twins is based on an estimated fetal weight (EFW) <3% as sole criterion and/or combinations of 4 contributory criteria (1 twin EFW <10%; 1 twin abdominal circumference <10%; EFW discordance ≥25%; and smaller twin umbilical artery [UA] pulsatility index >95th percentile). We assessed these criteria in sFGR Type III (intermittent absent or reversed end‐diastolic flow of the UA [iAREDF]) patients to test whether meeting the more stringent parameters of the consensus definition had worse outcomes, that is, progression to sFGR Type II (persistent AREDF) or twin‐twin transfusion syndrome; or secondarily, decreased dual survivorship. Methods This was a retrospective study of referred sFGR Type III patients (2006–2017). Patients were retrospectively categorized using consensus criteria for 2 comparisons: 1) EFW <3% versus remaining cohort; 2) EFW <3% or met all 4 contributory criteria versus remaining cohort. Results Forty‐eight patients were studied. Comparison 1: EFW <3% patients (58.3%) were not more likely to demonstrate disease progression (46.4% versus 65.0%, P = .2489) or worse dual survivorship (78.6% versus 85.0%, P = .7161). Comparison 2: EFW <3% or met all 4 contributory criteria (75.0%) patients were not more likely than the others to demonstrate progression (44.4% versus 83.3%, P = .0235) or worse dual survivorship (80.6% versus 83.3%, P = 1.0000). Conclusions In a referred cohort of sFGR Type III patients, there was no evidence that meeting more stringent parameters of the consensus definition was associated with disease progression or dual survivorship.