BibTex RIS Cite

İmmün Olmayan Hidrops Fetalis Olgularının Değerlendirilmesi

Year 2013, Volume: 7 Issue: 1, 1 - 5, 01.04.2013

Abstract

Giriş ve Amaç: Bu çalışmada dört yıl içerisinde hastanemizde doğan bebekler içinde immün olmayan hidrops fetalis tanısı alan olguların özelliklerini değerlendirdik.Gereç ve Yöntemler: Retrospektif olarak planlanan ve etik kurul onayı alınan çalışmaya Ocak 2008 ile Aralık 2011 tarihleri arasında hastanemizde doğan, immün olmayan hidrops fetalis tanısı alan olgular dahil edildi.Bulgular: Çalışma süresince 39 olgu immün olmayan hidrops fetalis tanısı aldı. Olgulardan 22’si (%56.4) antenatal dönemde tanı almıştı ve bunların 8’inin (%20.5) nedeni prenatal dönemde saptandı. En sık saptanan bulgu tüm hastalarda görülen yaygın cilt ödemi (%100) iken, neonatal asit (%84.6) ikinci sıklıkta saptandı. Neden olarak iki olguda konjenital kalp hastalığı, iki olguda supraventriküler taşikardi, iki olguda konjenital kistik adenomatoid malformasyon, iki olguda şilotoraks, yedi olguda ikizden ikize transfüzyon sendromu, üç olguda anemi saptanırken, beş olgunun dismorfik olduğu, bir olguda kistik higromaya ve bir olguda ise intrauterin perfore mekonyum ileusuna bağlı immün olmayan hidrops fetalis geliştiği düşünüldü. Geri kalan 14 (%35.9) olguda ise neden bulunamadı. Mortalite oranı %76.9 (30/39) olup, 16’sı (%41) ilk 24 saat içinde kaybedildi.Sonuç: İmmün olmayan hidrops fetalis olgularında mortalite oranı halen çok yüksektir. Çalışmamızda antenatal dönemde en sık rastlanılan bulgular cilt ödemi ve neonatal asitti. Nedenler arasında farklı organ ve sistemlerin hastalıkları yer almaktadır. Bu yüzden tanı için çok sayıda test ve incelemenin kısa sürede yapılması gerekebilmektedir.

References

  • Lorch SA, Mollen TJ. Nonımmune hydrops. In: Christine A. Gleason, Sherin U. Devaskar Eds. Avery’s Disease of the Newborn. 9th ed. 2012;81-7.
  • Mahony BS, Filly RA, Callen PW, Chinn DH, Golbus MS. Severe nonimmune hydrops fetalis: Sonographic evaluation. Radiology 1984;151:757-61.
  • Branch DW. Immunologic disease and fetal death. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1987;30:295-311.
  • Bellini C, Fulcheri E, Rutigliani M, Calevo MG, Boccardo F, Campisi, et al. Etiology of nonimmune hydrops fetalis: A systematic review. Am J Med Genet A 2009;149A:844-51.
  • Graves GR, Baskett TF. Nonimmune hydrops fetalis: Antenatal diagnosis and management. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1984;148: 563-65.
  • Hutchison AA, Drew JH, Yu VY, Williams ML, Fortune DW, Beischer NA. Nonimmunologic hydrops fetalis: A review of 61 cases. Obstet Gynecol 1982;59:347-52.
  • Sohan K, Carroll SG, De La Fuente S, Soothill P, Kyle P. Analysis of outcome in hydrops fetalis in relation to gestational age at diagnosis, cause and treatment. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2001;80:726-30.
  • Santo S, Mansour S, Thilaganathan B, Homfray T, Papageorghiou A, Calvert S, et al. Prenatal diagnosis of non-immune hydrops fetalis: What do we tell the parents? Prenat Diagn 2011;31: 186-95.
  • Jones D. Nonimmune fetal hydrops: Diagnosis and management. Semin Perinatol 1995;19:447-61.
  • Bullard K, Harrison M. Before the horse is out of the barn: Fetal surgery for hydrops. Semin Perinatol 1995;19:462-73.
  • Bukowski R, Saade GR. Hydrops fetalis. Clin Perinatol 2000;27:1007-31.
  • Bellini C, Boccardo F, Bonioli E, Campisi C. Lymphodynamics in the fetus and newborn. Lymphology 2006;39:110-17.
  • Galea P, Jain V, Fisk NM. Insights into the pathophysiology of twin- twin transfusion syndrome. Prenat Diagn 2005;25:777-85.
  • Van Den Wijngaard JP, Ross MG, Van Gement MJ. Twin-twin transfusion syndrome modeling. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2007;1101: 215-34.
  • Türkiye Nüfus ve Sağlık Araştırması İleri Analiz Raporu, Ankara, 2010
  • Heinonen S, Ryynänen M, Kirkinen P. Etiology and outcome of second trimester non-immunologic fetal hydrops. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2000;79:15-8.

Evaluation of Cases with Nonimmune Hydrops Fetalis

Year 2013, Volume: 7 Issue: 1, 1 - 5, 01.04.2013

Abstract

Objective: We evaluated the characteristics of babies with nonimmune hydrops fetalis born at our hospital during a four-year period.Material and Methods: All newborns with a prenatal or early neonatal diagnosis of nonimmune hydrops fetalis based on clinical history, physical and laboratory examination during the period between January 2008 and December 2011 were evaluated retrospectively.results: A total of 39 newborns with hydrops fetalis were included in this study. Twenty two infants (56.4%) were diagnosed in the antenatal period, and the etiological factor was evident in the prenatal period in 8 infants (20.5%). The most common finding was skin edema in all patients (100%), while neonatal ascites (84.6%) was the second most common sign. Findings related with nonimmune hydrops fetalis were as follows: congenital heart disease (2/39), arrythmia (2/39), congenital cystic adenomatoid malformation (2/39), chylothorax (2/39), cystic hygroma (1/39), twin-totwin transfusion syndrome (7/39), anemia (3/39), genetic/chromosomal abnormalities (5/39), and perforated intrauterine meconium ileus (1/39). No obvious cause was identified in 35.8% (14/39) of cases and these were classified as idiopathic. The mortality rate was 76.9%, and 16 of them (41%) died within the first 24 hours of life.conclusion: The mortality rate is still very high in nonimmune hydrops fetalis. The most common signs were skin edema and neonatal ascites in the antenatal period. Diseases of organs and systems were frequent among the causes of nonimmune hydrops fetalis. Comprehensive diagnostic testing and examinations should therefore be performed as soon as possible

References

  • Lorch SA, Mollen TJ. Nonımmune hydrops. In: Christine A. Gleason, Sherin U. Devaskar Eds. Avery’s Disease of the Newborn. 9th ed. 2012;81-7.
  • Mahony BS, Filly RA, Callen PW, Chinn DH, Golbus MS. Severe nonimmune hydrops fetalis: Sonographic evaluation. Radiology 1984;151:757-61.
  • Branch DW. Immunologic disease and fetal death. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1987;30:295-311.
  • Bellini C, Fulcheri E, Rutigliani M, Calevo MG, Boccardo F, Campisi, et al. Etiology of nonimmune hydrops fetalis: A systematic review. Am J Med Genet A 2009;149A:844-51.
  • Graves GR, Baskett TF. Nonimmune hydrops fetalis: Antenatal diagnosis and management. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1984;148: 563-65.
  • Hutchison AA, Drew JH, Yu VY, Williams ML, Fortune DW, Beischer NA. Nonimmunologic hydrops fetalis: A review of 61 cases. Obstet Gynecol 1982;59:347-52.
  • Sohan K, Carroll SG, De La Fuente S, Soothill P, Kyle P. Analysis of outcome in hydrops fetalis in relation to gestational age at diagnosis, cause and treatment. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2001;80:726-30.
  • Santo S, Mansour S, Thilaganathan B, Homfray T, Papageorghiou A, Calvert S, et al. Prenatal diagnosis of non-immune hydrops fetalis: What do we tell the parents? Prenat Diagn 2011;31: 186-95.
  • Jones D. Nonimmune fetal hydrops: Diagnosis and management. Semin Perinatol 1995;19:447-61.
  • Bullard K, Harrison M. Before the horse is out of the barn: Fetal surgery for hydrops. Semin Perinatol 1995;19:462-73.
  • Bukowski R, Saade GR. Hydrops fetalis. Clin Perinatol 2000;27:1007-31.
  • Bellini C, Boccardo F, Bonioli E, Campisi C. Lymphodynamics in the fetus and newborn. Lymphology 2006;39:110-17.
  • Galea P, Jain V, Fisk NM. Insights into the pathophysiology of twin- twin transfusion syndrome. Prenat Diagn 2005;25:777-85.
  • Van Den Wijngaard JP, Ross MG, Van Gement MJ. Twin-twin transfusion syndrome modeling. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2007;1101: 215-34.
  • Türkiye Nüfus ve Sağlık Araştırması İleri Analiz Raporu, Ankara, 2010
  • Heinonen S, Ryynänen M, Kirkinen P. Etiology and outcome of second trimester non-immunologic fetal hydrops. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2000;79:15-8.
There are 16 citations in total.

Details

Other ID JA27JH73FM
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Avidan Kizilelma Yiğit This is me

Şerife Suna Oğuz

Uğur Dilmen This is me

Publication Date April 1, 2013
Submission Date April 1, 2013
Published in Issue Year 2013 Volume: 7 Issue: 1

Cite

Vancouver Yiğit AK, Oğuz ŞS, Dilmen U. Evaluation of Cases with Nonimmune Hydrops Fetalis. Türkiye Çocuk Hast Derg. 2013;7(1):1-5.


The publication language of Turkish Journal of Pediatric Disease is English.


Manuscripts submitted to the Turkish Journal of Pediatric Disease will go through a double-blind peer-review process. Each submission will be reviewed by at least two external, independent peer reviewers who are experts in the field, in order to ensure an unbiased evaluation process. The editorial board will invite an external and independent editor to manage the evaluation processes of manuscripts submitted by editors or by the editorial board members of the journal. The Editor in Chief is the final authority in the decision-making process for all submissions. Articles accepted for publication in the Turkish Journal of Pediatrics are put in the order of publication, with at least 10 original articles in each issue, taking into account the acceptance dates. If the articles sent to the reviewers for evaluation are assessed as a senior for publication by the reviewers, the section editor and the editor considering all aspects (originality, high scientific quality and citation potential), it receives publication priority in addition to the articles assigned for the next issue.


The aim of the Turkish Journal of Pediatrics is to publish high-quality original research articles that will contribute to the international literature in the field of general pediatric health and diseases and its sub-branches. It also publishes editorial opinions, letters to the editor, reviews, case reports, book reviews, comments on previously published articles, meeting and conference proceedings, announcements, and biography. In addition to the field of child health and diseases, the journal also includes articles prepared in fields such as surgery, dentistry, public health, nutrition and dietetics, social services, human genetics, basic sciences, psychology, psychiatry, educational sciences, sociology and nursing, provided that they are related to this field. can be published.