Intrapartum Ultrasound Guidance to Make Safer Any Obstetric Intervention: Fetal Head Rotation, Assisted Vaginal Birth, Breech Delivery of the Second Twin.
Journal
Clinical obstetrics and gynecology
ISSN: 1532-5520
Titre abrégé: Clin Obstet Gynecol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0070014
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Dec 2024
01 Dec 2024
Historique:
medline:
21
10
2024
pubmed:
21
10
2024
entrez:
21
10
2024
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Intrapartum ultrasound (US) is more reliable than clinical assessment in determining parameters of crucial importance to optimize the management of labor including the position and station of the presenting part. Evidence from the literature supports the role of intrapartum US in predicting the outcome of labor in women diagnosed with slow progress during the first and second stage of labor, and randomized data have demonstrated that transabdominal US is far more accurate than digital examination in assessing fetal position before performing an instrumental delivery. Intrapartum US has also been shown to outperform the clinical skills in predicting the outcome and improving the technique of instrumental vaginal delivery. On this basis, some guidelines recommend intrapartum US to ascertain occiput position before performing an instrumental delivery. Manual rotation of occiput posterior position (MROP) and assisted breech delivery of the second twin are other obstetric interventions that can be performed during the second stage of labor with the support of intrapartum US. In this review article we summarize the existing evidence on the role of intrapartum US in assisting different types of obstetric intervention with the aim to improve their safety.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39431493
doi: 10.1097/GRF.0000000000000891
pii: 00003081-202412000-00014
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
730-738Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.
Références
Sherer DM, Miodovnik M, Bradley KS, et al. Intrapartum fetal head position I: comparison between transvaginal digital examination and transabdominal ultrasound assessment during the active stage of labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2002;19:258–263.
Sherer DM, Miodovnik M, Bradley KS, et al. Intrapartum fetal head position II: comparison between transvaginal digital examination and transabdominal ultrasound assessment during the second stage of labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2002;19:264–268.
Akmal S, Kametas N, Tsoi E, et al. Comparison of transvaginal digital examination with intrapartum sonography to determine fetal head position before instrumental delivery. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2003;21:437–440.
Dupuis O, Ruimark S, Corinne D, et al. Fetal head position during the second stage of labor: comparison of digital vaginal examination and transabdominal ultrasonographic examination. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2005;123:193–197.
Ramphul M, Ooi PV, Burke G, et al. Instrumental delivery and ultrasound : a multicentre randomised controlled trial of ultrasound assessment of the fetal head position versus standard care as an approach to prevent morbidity at instrumental delivery. BJOG. 2014;121:1029–1038.
Ghi T, Dall’Asta A, Masturzo B, et al. Randomised Italian Sonography for occiput POSition Trial Ante vacuum (R.I.S.POS.T.A.). Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018;52:699–705.
Ghi T, Bellussi F, Pilu G. Sonographic diagnosis of lateral asynclitism: a new subtype of fetal head malposition as a main determinant of early labor arrest. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;45:229–231.
Torkildsen EA, Salvesen KÅ, Eggebø TM. Prediction of delivery mode with transperineal ultrasound in women with prolonged first stage of labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011;37:702–708.
Eggebø TM, Hassan WA, Salvesen KÅ, et al. Prediction of delivery mode by ultrasound-assessed fetal position in nulliparous women with prolonged first stage of labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;46:606–610.
Eggebø TM, Hassan WA, Salvesen KÅ, et al. Sonographic prediction of vaginal delivery in prolonged labor: a two-center study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014;43:195–201.
Kalache KD, Dückelmann AM, Michaelis SA, et al. Transperineal ultrasound imaging in prolonged second stage of labor with occipitoanterior presenting fetuses: how well does the “angle of progression” predict the mode of delivery? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009;33:326–330.
Gilboa Y, Kivilevitch Z, Spira M, et al. Head progression distance in prolonged second stage of labor: relationship with mode of delivery and fetal head station. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013;41:436–441.
Masturzo B, De Ruvo D, Gaglioti P, et al. Ultrasound imaging in prolonged second stage of labor: does it reduce the operative delivery rate? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014;27:1560–1563.
Chan VYT, Lau WL, So MKP, et al. Measuring angle of progression by transperineal ultrasonography to predict successful instrumental and cesarean deliveries during prolonged second stage of labor. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2019;144:192–198.
Dall’Asta A, Angeli L, Masturzo B, et al. Prediction of spontaneous vaginal delivery in nulliparous women with a prolonged second stage of labor: the value of intrapartum ultrasound. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019;221:642.e1–642.e13.
Wong GY, Mok YM, Wong SF. Transabdominal ultrasound assessment of the fetal head and the accuracy of vacuum cup application. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2007;98:120–123.
Kahrs BH, Usman S, Ghi T, et al. Sonographic prediction of outcome of vacuum deliveries: a multicenter, prospective cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;217:69.e1–69.e10.
Bultez T, Quibel T, Bouhanna P, et al. Angle of fetal head progression measured using transperineal ultrasound as a predictive factor of vacuum extraction failure. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016;48:86–91.
Kasbaoui S, Séverac F, Aïssi G, et al. Predicting the difficulty of operative vaginal delivery by ultrasound measurement of fetal head station. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216:507.e1–507.e9.
Henrich W, Dudenhausen J, Fuchs I, et al. Intrapartum translabial ultrasound (ITU): sonographic landmarks and correlation with successful vacuum extraction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2006;28:753–760.
Sainz JA, Borrero C, Aquise A, et al. Utility of intrapartum transperineal ultrasound to predict cases of failure in vacuum extraction attempt and need of cesarean section to complete delivery. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016;29:1348–1352.
Hinkson L, Henrich W, Tutschek B. Intrapartum ultrasound during rotational forceps delivery: a novel tool for safety, quality control, and teaching. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021;224:93.e1–93.e7.
Ghi T, Eggebø T, Lees C, et al. ISUOG practice guidelines: intrapartum ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018;52:128–139.
Murphy DJ, Strachan BK, Bahl R, Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Assisted vaginal birth: green-top guideline no. 26. BJOG. 2020;127:e70–e112.
Rizzo G, Ghi T, Henrich W, et al. Ultrasound in labor: clinical practice guideline and recommendation by the WAPM-World Association of Perinatal Medicine and the PMF-Perinatal Medicine Foundation. J Perinat Med. 2022;50:1007–1029.
Ghi T, Dall’Asta A. Sonographic evaluation of the fetal head position and attitude during labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2024;230:S890–S900.
Hjartardóttir H, Lund SH, Benediktsdóttir S, et al. When does fetal head rotation occur in spontaneous labor at term: results of an ultrasound-based longitudinal study in nulliparous women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021;224:514.e1–514.e9.
Lieberman E, Davidson K, Lee-Parritz A, et al. Changes in fetal position during labor and their association with epidural analgesia. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;105(5 Pt 1):974–982.
Peregrine E, O’Brien P, Jauniaux E. Impact on delivery outcome of ultrasonographic fetal head position prior to induction of labor. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109:618–625.
Akmal S, Tsoi E, Howard R, et al. Investigation of occiput posterior delivery by intrapartum sonography. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2004;24:425–428.
Gardberg M, Tuppurainen M. Persistent occiput posterior presentation—a clinical problem. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1994;73:45–47.
Gardberg M, Laakkonen E, Sälevaara M. Intrapartum sonography and persistent occiput posterior position: a study of 408 deliveries. Obstet Gynecol. 1998;91(5 Pt 1):746–749.
Ponkey SE, Cohen AP, Heffner LJ, et al. Persistent fetal occiput posterior position: obstetric outcomes. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;101(5 Pt 1):915–920.
Vitner D, Paltieli Y, Haberman S, et al. Prospective multicenter study of ultrasound-based measurements of fetal head station and position throughout labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;46:611–615.
Palatnik A, Grobman WA, Hellendag MG, et al. Predictors of failed operative vaginal delivery in a contemporary obstetric cohort. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;127:501–506.
Ramphul M, Kennelly MM, Burke G, et al. Risk factors and morbidity associated with suboptimal instrument placement at instrumental delivery: observational study nested within the Instrumental Delivery & Ultrasound randomised controlled trial ISRCTN 72230496. BJOG. 2015;122:558–563.
Wu JM, Williams KS, Hundley AF, et al. Occiput posterior fetal head position increases the risk of anal sphincter injury in vacuum-assisted deliveries. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;193:525–529.
Cheng YW, Shaffer BL, Caughey AB. The association between persistent occiput posterior position and neonatal outcomes. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107:837–844.
Akmal S, Tsoi E, Kametas N, et al. Intrapartum sonography to determine fetal head position. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2002;12:172–177.
Fitzpatrick M, McQuillan K, O’Herlihy C. Influence of persistent occiput posterior position on delivery outcome. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;98:1027–1031.
Bellussi F, Ghi T, Youssef A, et al. Intrapartum ultrasound to differentiate flexion and deflexion in occipitoposterior rotation. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2017;42:249–256.
Malvasi A, Tinelli A, Barbera A, et al. Occiput posterior position diagnosis: vaginal examination or intrapartum sonography? A clinical review. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014;27:520–526.
Chou MR, Kreiser D, Taslimi MM, et al. Vaginal versus ultrasound examination of fetal occiput position during the second stage of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191:521–524.
Zahalka N, Sadan O, Malinger G, et al. Comparison of transvaginal sonography with digital examination and transabdominal sonography for the determination of fetal head position in the second stage of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;193:381–386.
Bellussi F, Ghi T, Youssef A, et al. The use of intrapartum ultrasound to diagnose malpositions and cephalic malpresentations. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;217:633–641.
Benediktsdottir S, Salvesen KÅ, Hjartardottir H, et al. Reproducibility and acceptability of ultrasound measurements of head-perineum distance. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2018;97:97–103.
Tutschek B, Braun T, Chantraine F, et al. A study of progress of labour using intrapartum translabial ultrasound, assessing head station, direction, and angle of descent. BJOG. 2011;118:62–69.
Youssef A, Maroni E, Ragusa A, et al. Fetal head-symphysis distance: a simple and reliable ultrasound index of fetal head station in labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013;41:419–424.
Tutschek B, Torkildsen EA, Eggebø TM. Comparison between ultrasound parameters and clinical examination to assess fetal head station in labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013;41:425–429.
Maticot-Baptista D, Ramanah R, Collin A, et al. Diagnostic échographique d’engagement de la présentation foetale. A propos d’une série prospective préliminaire française [Ultrasound in the diagnosis of fetal head engagement. A preliminary French prospective study]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2009;38:474–480.
Popowski T, Porcher R, Fort J, et al. Influence of ultrasound determination of fetal head position on mode of delivery: a pragmatic randomized trial. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;46:520–525.
Brunelli E, Youssef A, Soliman EM, et al. The role of the angle of progression in the prediction of the outcome of occiput posterior position in the second stage of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021;225:81.e1–81.e9.
Ghi T, Bellussi F, Azzarone C, et al. The “occiput-spine angle”: a new sonographic index of fetal head deflexion during the first stage of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;215:84.e1–84.e847.
Dall’Asta A, Rizzo G, Masturzo B, et al. Occiput-spine angle and prediction of cesarean delivery in protracted active phase of labor: occiput position does matter. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021;225:686.e1–686.e3.
Dall’Asta A, Rizzo G, Masturzo B, et al. Intrapartum sonographic assessment of the fetal head flexion in protracted active phase of labor and association with labor outcome: a multicenter, prospective study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021;225:171.e1–171.e12.
Bellussi F, Livi A, Cataneo I, et al. Sonographic diagnosis of fetal head deflexion and the risk of cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2020;2:100217.
Ramirez Zegarra R, Dall’Asta A, Di Pasquo E, et al. Prediction of persistent occiput posterior position by sonographic assessment of fetal head attitude at start of second stage of labor: prospective study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2024;63:251–257.
Phipps H, de Vries B, Lee PN, et al. Management of occiput posterior position in the second stage of labour: a survey of obstetric practice in Australia and New Zealand. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2012;52:450–454.
Phipps H, de Vries B, Jagadish U, et al. Management of occiput posterior position in the second stage of labor: a survey of midwifery practice in Australia. Birth. 2014;41:64–69.
Reichman O, Gdansky E, Latinsky B, et al. Digital rotation from occipito-posterior to occipito-anterior decreases the need for cesarean section. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2008;136:25–28.
Shaffer BL, Cheng YW, Vargas JE, et al. Manual rotation to reduce caesarean delivery in persistent occiput posterior or transverse position. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2011;24:65–72.
Tempest N, McGuinness N, Lane S, et al. Neonatal and maternal outcomes of successful manual rotation to correct malposition of the fetal head; a retrospective and prospective observational study. PLoS One. 2017;12:e0176861.
Caughey AB, Cahill AG, Guise JM, et alAmerican College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (College); Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210:179–193.
Tarnier S, Chantreuil G. Traité de l’art des accouchements (Tome 2). Lauwereyus H, Libraire-Editeur; 1982.
Blanc J, Castel P, Mauviel F, et al. Prophylactic manual rotation of occiput posterior and transverse positions to decrease operative delivery: the PROPOP randomized clinical trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021;225:444.e1–444.e8.
de Vries B, Phipps H, Kuah S, et al. Transverse position. Using rotation to aid normal birth-OUTcomes following manual rotation (the TURN-OUT trial): a randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2022;4:100488–100498; de Vries.
Phipps H, Hyett JA, Kuah S, et al. Persistent occiput posterior position outcomes following manual rotation: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2021;3:100306–100320.
Graham K, Phipps H, Hyett JA, et al. Persistent occiput posterior: OUTcomes following digital rotation: a pilot randomised controlled trial. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2014;54:268–274.
Broberg JC, Caughey AB. A randomized controlled trial of prophylactic early manual rotation of the occiput posterior fetus at the beginning of the second stage vs expectant management. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2021;3:100327–100333.
Burd J, Gomez J, Berghella V, et al. Prophylactic rotation for malposition in the second stage of labor: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2022;4:100554–100565.
Bertholdt C, Piffer A, Pol H, et al. Management of persistent occiput posterior position: The added value of manual rotation. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2022;157:613–617.
Dall’Asta A, Fieni S, Ghi T. Real-time ultrasound demonstration of successful manual rotation of occiput posterior position. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2024. doi:10.1002/uog.27638 Online ahead of print.
doi: 10.1002/uog.27638
Committee on Practice Bulletins— Obstetrics with the assistance of Alan M. Peaceman, MD. Operative vaginal birth: ACOG Practice Bulletin, Number 219. Obstet Gynecol. 2020;135:e149–e159.
Memon HU, Blomquist JL, Dietz HP, et al. Comparison of levator ani muscle avulsion injury after forceps-assisted and vacuum-assisted vaginal childbirth. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125:1080–1087.
Jangö H, Langhoff-Roos J, Rosthøj S, et al. Modifiable risk factors of obstetric anal sphincter injury in primiparous women: a population-based cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210:59.e1–59.e596.
Boo NY, Foong KW, Mahdy ZA, et al. Risk factors associated with subaponeurotic haemorrhage in full-term infants exposed to vacuum extraction. BJOG. 2005;112:1516–1521.
Doumouchtsis SK, Arulkumaran S. Head injuries after instrumental vaginal deliveries. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2006;18:129–134.
Johanson RB, Menon BK. Vacuum extraction versus forceps for assisted vaginal delivery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000;2:CD000224–CD000354.
Aiken CE, Aiken AR, Brockelsby JC, et al. Factors influencing the likelihood of instrumental delivery success. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123:796–803.
Verhoeven CJ, Nuij C, Janssen-Rolf CR, et al. Predictors for failure of vacuum-assisted vaginal delivery: a case-control study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;200:29–34.
Benedetti TJ. Birth injury and method of delivery. N Engl J Med. 1999;341:1758–1759.
Olagundoye V, MacKenzie IZ. The impact of a trial of instrumental delivery in theatre on neonatal outcome. BJOG. 2007;114:603–608.
Muraca GM, Sabr Y, Lisonkova S, et al. Perinatal and maternal morbidity and mortality after attempted operative vaginal delivery at midpelvic station. CMAJ. 2017;189:E764–E772.
Ducarme G, Hamel JF, Bouet PE, et al. Maternal and neonatal morbidity after attempted operative vaginal delivery according to fetal head station. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126:521–529.
Muraca GM, Skoll A, Lisonkova S, et al. Perinatal and maternal morbidity and mortality among term singletons following midcavity operative vaginal delivery versus caesarean delivery. BJOG. 2018;125:693–702.
Murphy DJ, Liebling RE, Verity L, et al. Early maternal and neonatal morbidity associated with operative delivery in second stage of labour: a cohort study. Lancet. 2001;358:1203–1207.
Gardella C, Taylor M, Benedetti T, et al. The effect of sequential use of vacuum and forceps for assisted vaginal delivery on neonatal and maternal outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;185:896–902.
Murphy DJ, Macleod M, Bahl R, et al. A cohort study of maternal and neonatal morbidity in relation to use of sequential instruments at operative vaginal delivery. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2011;156:41–45.
Crichton D. A reliable method of establishing the level of the fetal head in obstetrics. S Afr Med J. 1974;48:784–787.
Buchmann E, Libhaber E. Interobserver agreement in intrapartum estimation of fetal head station. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2008;101:285–289.
Barros JG, Afonso M, Martins AT, et al. Transabdominal and transperineal ultrasound vs routine care before instrumental vaginal delivery—a randomized controlled trial. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2021;100:1075–1081.
Mappa I, Tartaglia S, Maqina P, et al. Ultrasound vs routine care before instrumental vaginal delivery: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2021;100:1941–1948.
Bellussi F, Di Mascio D, Salsi G, et al. Sonographic knowledge of occiput position to decrease failed operative vaginal delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022;226:499–509.
Dall’Asta A, Rizzo G, Ghi T. Intrapartum ultrasound before instrumental vaginal delivery: clinical benefits are difficult to demonstrate. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2021;100:988–989.
Nallet C, Ramirez Zegarra R, Mazellier S, et al. Head-to-perineum distance measured transperineally as a predictor of failed midcavity vacuum-assisted delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2023;5:100827–100837.
Sainz JA, García-Mejido JA, Aquise A, et al. Intrapartum transperineal ultrasound used to predict cases of complicated operative (vacuum and forceps) deliveries in nulliparous women. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2017;96:1490–1497.
Sainz JA, García-Mejido JA, Aquise A, et al. A simple model to predict the complicated operative vaginal deliveries using vacuum or forceps. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019;220:193.e1–193.e12.
Barrett JF, Hannah ME, Hutton EK, et al. A randomized trial of planned cesarean or vaginal delivery for twin pregnancy [published correction appears in N Engl J Med. 2013 Dec 12;369(24):2364]. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:1295–1305.
Schmitz T, Prunet C, Azria E, et al. Association between planned cesarean delivery and neonatal mortality and morbidity in twin pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;129:986–995.
Ghi T, Dall’Asta A, Kiener A, et al. Intrapartum diagnosis of posterior asynclitism using two-dimensional transperineal ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;49:803–804.
Ghi T, Youssef A, Pilu G, et al. Intrapartum sonographic imaging of fetal head asynclitism. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2012;39:238–240.
Malvasi A, Stark M, Ghi T, et al. Intrapartum sonography for fetal head asynclitism and transverse position: sonographic signs and comparison of diagnostic performance between transvaginal and digital examination. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2012;25:508–512.
Malvasi A, Tinelli A. Intrapartum sonography: two sings to detect asynclitism degree. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016;29:1289–1290.
Malvasi A, Tinelli A. Intrapartum sonography asynclitism diagnosis by transperineal ultrasonography. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2018;31:1530–1531.
Dall’Asta A, Lau W, Chan V, et al. Present and future of ultrasound in labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2022;4:100629–100631.
Hung CMW, Chan VYT, Ghi T, et al. Asynclitism in the second stage of labor: prevalence, associations, and outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2021;3:100437–100444.
Sau A, Sau M, Ahmed H, et al. Vacuum extraction: is there any need to improve the current training in the UK? Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2004;83:466–470.
Sharshiner R, Silver RM. Management of fetal malpresentation. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2015;58:246–255.
Dall’Asta A, Volpe N, Galli L, et al. Intrapartum sonographic diagnosis of compound hand-cephalic presentation. Ultraschall Med. 2017;38:558–559.
Smith GCS. Mode of delivery of twins at term. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2022;84:194–204.
Committee on Practice Bulletins—Obstetrics and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine with the assistance of Edward J. Hayes. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 144: Multifetal gestations: twin, triplet, and higher-order multifetal pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123:1118–1132.
Twin and Triplet Pregnancy. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE); 2019.
FIGO Working Group on Good Clinical Practice in Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Good clinical practice advice: management of twin pregnancy. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2019;144:330–337.
Mei-Dan E, Jain V, Melamed N, et al. Guideline no. 428: management of dichorionic twin pregnancies. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2022;44:819–834.e1.
Lee HS, Abbasi N, Van Mieghem T, et al. Guideline no. 440: management of monochorionic twin pregnancies. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2023;45:587–606.e8.