Key result
TTTS recipients exhibit ventricular dilatation and reduced RV contractility, while donors show stiffer aortas versus singletons.
Why the study?
While impaired cardiac function is noted in recipient fetuses with twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome, systematic data after birth are lacking.
Does twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome status (donor vs recipient) affect postnatal cardiovascular function and arterial stiffness compared to singletons?
Cohort
Does twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome status (donor vs recipient) affect postnatal cardiovascular function and arterial stiffness compared to singletons?
Postnatal cardiovascular evaluation of twins with twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome reveals distinct pathophysiological profiles, with recipients showing cardiac remodeling and dysfunction, and donors exhibiting increased arterial stiffness.
May support differential postnatal cardiac surveillance in TTTS twins; leaves open whether this improves outcomes.
Evaluation for fetuses with twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome noted impaired cardiac function in recipients. Systematic data after birth are lacking. We noted greater ventricular dilatation, globularity, and hypertrophied interventricular septum in the recipient. Right ventricular contractility was reduced; differences between recipients-singletons had greater statistical significance compared with donors-singletons. The aorta had greater stiffness and lower distensibility in donors compared with recipients; the differences for arterial indices were statistically more significant with donors-singletons.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ting et al. (2024) conducted a cohort in Twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome. Recipient twins vs. Donor twins and singletons was evaluated on Postnatal cardiovascular function and arterial indices. Recipient twins exhibited greater ventricular dilatation and reduced right ventricular contractility, while donor twins showed greater aortic stiffness and lower distensibility compared to singletons.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: