Frank Van Calenbergh1, Luc Joyeux2,3, Jan Deprest2,3,4. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospitals Leuven, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. Frank.Vancalenbergh@uzleuven.be. 2. Academic Department Development and Regeneration, Cluster Organ Systems, Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 3. Center for Surgical Technologies, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospitals Leuven, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The results of the Management of Myelomeningocele Study (MOMS) randomized controlled trial have demonstrated that maternal-fetal surgery (MFS) for myelomeningocele (MMC) compared to postnatal MMC repair has clear neurological benefits for the child at 12 and 30 months of age. Level I evidence nevertheless does not provide answers to many questions in this delicate field. Since the beginning of 2012, our fetal center has been offering MFS for spina bifida aperta (SBA) to patients from different European and non-European countries, in a societal context where termination of pregnancy is the option chosen by most patients when being informed of this diagnosis. METHODS: We aim to explore in this text some of the ethical, legal, and psychological issues that we have encountered. RESULTS: For many of these questions, we do not have definite answers. A pregnant patient when diagnosed with a MMC fetus is a vulnerable subject. She needs to be referred to a highly specialized center with sufficient expertise in diagnosis and in all therapeutic options. Objective but compassionate counseling is of paramount importance. It is required that a multidisciplinary professional team obtains full voluntary consent from the mother after providing an appropriate information including diagnosis, short-, medium-, and long-term prognosis as well as benefits and harms of the fetal surgery. CONCLUSION: The latter should be offered with full respect for maternal choice and individual assessment and perception of potential risks taking into consideration legislation in the fetal center and the parents' country legislation.
BACKGROUND: The results of the Management of Myelomeningocele Study (MOMS) randomized controlled trial have demonstrated that maternal-fetal surgery (MFS) for myelomeningocele (MMC) compared to postnatal MMC repair has clear neurological benefits for the child at 12 and 30 months of age. Level I evidence nevertheless does not provide answers to many questions in this delicate field. Since the beginning of 2012, our fetal center has been offering MFS for spina bifida aperta (SBA) to patients from different European and non-European countries, in a societal context where termination of pregnancy is the option chosen by most patients when being informed of this diagnosis. METHODS: We aim to explore in this text some of the ethical, legal, and psychological issues that we have encountered. RESULTS: For many of these questions, we do not have definite answers. A pregnant patient when diagnosed with a MMC fetus is a vulnerable subject. She needs to be referred to a highly specialized center with sufficient expertise in diagnosis and in all therapeutic options. Objective but compassionate counseling is of paramount importance. It is required that a multidisciplinary professional team obtains full voluntary consent from the mother after providing an appropriate information including diagnosis, short-, medium-, and long-term prognosis as well as benefits and harms of the fetal surgery. CONCLUSION: The latter should be offered with full respect for maternal choice and individual assessment and perception of potential risks taking into consideration legislation in the fetal center and the parents' country legislation.
Authors: R Douglas Wilson; Kerrie Lemerand; Mark P Johnson; Alan W Flake; Michael Bebbington; Holly L Hedrick; N Scott Adzick Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: N Scott Adzick; Elizabeth A Thom; Catherine Y Spong; John W Brock; Pamela K Burrows; Mark P Johnson; Lori J Howell; Jody A Farrell; Mary E Dabrowiak; Leslie N Sutton; Nalin Gupta; Noel B Tulipan; Mary E D'Alton; Diana L Farmer Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-02-09 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Anja Vinck; Maria W G Nijhuis-van der Sanden; Nel J A Roeleveld; Reinier A Mullaart; Jan J Rotteveel; Ben A M Maassen Journal: Eur J Paediatr Neurol Date: 2009-02-23 Impact factor: 3.140
Authors: Thomas Kohl; Rudolph Hering; Axel Heep; Carlo Schaller; Bernhard Meyer; Claudia Greive; Gabriele Bizjak; Tim Buller; Patricia Van de Vondel; Wiebke Gogarten; Peter Bartmann; Gisela Knopfle; Ulrich Gembruch Journal: Fetal Diagn Ther Date: 2006 Impact factor: 2.587
Authors: John W Brock; Michael C Carr; N Scott Adzick; Pamela K Burrows; John C Thomas; Elizabeth A Thom; Lori J Howell; Jody A Farrell; Mary E Dabrowiak; Diana L Farmer; Earl Y Cheng; Bradley P Kropp; Anthony A Caldamone; Dorothy I Bulas; Susan Tolivaisa; Laurence S Baskin Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Saskia Hendriks; Christine Grady; David Wasserman; David Wendler; Diana W Bianchi; Benjamin E Berkman Journal: Am J Bioeth Date: 2021-01-16 Impact factor: 11.229
Authors: Gordon Worley; Rachel G Greenberg; Brandon G Rocque; Tiebin Liu; Brad E Dicianno; Jonathan P Castillo; Elisabeth A Ward; Tonya R Williams; Jeffrey P Blount; John S Wiener Journal: Dev Med Child Neurol Date: 2021-01-02 Impact factor: 5.449
Authors: Adalina Sacco; Fred Ushakov; Dominic Thompson; Donald Peebles; Pranav Pandya; Paolo De Coppi; Ruwan Wimalasundera; George Attilakos; Anna Louise David; Jan Deprest Journal: Obstet Gynaecol Date: 2019-09-27