Is there a role for fetal interventions in gastroschisis management? - An updated comprehensive review

We conducted a comprehensive evidence-based review on the epidemiology and current standard of care of gastroschisis management as well as the pathophysiology, rationale and feasibility of fetal therapy as a viable alternative. Gastroschisis is a periumbilical abdominal wall defect characterized by abdominal viscera herniation in utero. It affects 4 in 10 000 live births, but the prevalence has steadily increased in recent years. Gastroschisis is typically diagnosed on routine second-trimester ultrasound. The overall prognosis is favorable, but complex gastroschisis, which accounts for about 10% to 15% of cases, is associated with a higher mortality, significant disease burden and higher healthcare costs due to long- and short-term complications. The current standard of care has yet to be established but generally involves continued fetal surveillance and multidisciplinary perinatal care. Postnatal surgical repair is achieved with primary closure, staged silo closure or sutureless repair. Experimental animal studies have demonstrated the feasibility of in utero closure, antiinflammatory therapy and prenatal regenerative therapy. However, reports of early preterm delivery and amnioinfusion trials have failed to show any benefit in humans. Further experimental studies and human trials are necessary to demonstrate the potential benefit of fetal therapy in gastroschisis.

The influence of gestational age, mode of delivery and abdominal wall closure method on the surgical outcome of neonates with uncomplicated gastroschisis

AIM OF THE STUDY

To evaluate if gestational age (GA), mode of delivery and abdominal wall closure method influence outcomes in uncomplicated gastroschisis (GTC).

METHODS

Retrospective review of NICU admissions for gastroschisis, August 2008-July 2016. Primary outcomes were: time to start enteral feeds (on-EF), time to discontinue parenteral nutrition (off-PN), and length of stay (LOS).

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 200 patients with GTC were admitted to our NICU. Patients initially operated elsewhere (n = 13) were excluded. Patients with medical/surgical complications (n = 62) were analyzed separately. The study included 125 cases of uncomplicated GTC. There were no statistically significant differences in the outcomes of patients born late preterm (34 0/7-36 6/7; n = 70) and term (n = 40): on-EF 19 (5-54) versus 17 (7-34) days (p = 0.29), off-PN 32 (12-101) versus 30 (16-52) days (p = 0.46) and LOS 40 (18-137) versus 37 (21-67) days (p = 0.29), respectively. Patients born before 34 weeks GA (n = 15) had significantly longer on-EF, off-PN and LOS times compared to late preterm patients: 26 (12-50) days (p = 0.01), 41 (20-105) days (p = 0.04) and 62 (34-150) days (p < 0.01), respectively. There were no significant differences in outcomes between patients delivered by C-section (n = 62) and patients delivered vaginally (n = 63): on-EF 20 (5-50) versus 19 (7-54) days (p = 0.72), off-PN 32 (12-78) versus 33 (15-105) days (p = 0.83), LOS 42 (18-150) versus 41 (18-139) days (p = 0.68), respectively. There were significant differences in outcomes between patients who underwent primary reduction (n = 37) and patients who had a silo (88): on-EF 15 (5-37) versus 22 (6-54) days (p < 0.01), off-PN 28 (12-52) versus 34 (15-105) days (p = 0.04), LOS 36 (18-72) versus 44 (21-150) days (p = 0.04), respectively.

CONCLUSION

In our experience, late preterm delivery did not affect outcomes compared to term delivery in uncomplicated GTC. Outcomes were also not influenced by the mode of delivery. Patients who underwent primary reduction had better outcomes than patients who underwent silo placement.