Fetal therapy: practical ethical considerations

Progress in prenatal diagnosis can lead to the diagnosis of severe fetal abnormalities for which natural history anticipates a fatal outcome or the development of severe disability despite optimal postnatal care. Intrauterine therapy can be offered in these selected cases. Prenatal diagnosis is the only field of medicine in which termination is an option in the management of severe diseases. Fetal therapy has therefore developed as an alternative to fatalist expectant prenatal management as well as to termination of pregnancy (TOP). There are few standards of fetal care that have gone beyond the stage of equipoise and even fewer have been established based on appropriate studies comparing pre- and postnatal care. Several ethical questions are being raised as fetal surgery develops, including basic Hippocratic principles of patients' autonomy and doctors' duty of competence moving the boundaries between experimental surgery, therapeutic innovation and standard care. In addition, the technical success of a fetal intervention can only rarely fully predict the postnatal outcome. Managing uncertainty regarding long-term morbidity and the possibility for fetal therapy to change the risk of perinatal death into that of severe handicap remains a critical factor affecting women's choice for TOP as an alternative to fetal therapy. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

New and/or improved aspects of fetal surgery

Open fetal surgery through a wide hysterotomy is no longer a real option for prenatal intervention, but a minimally invasive approach has emerged as treatment for a small number of indications. Endoscopic ablation of placental vessels is the preferred treatment for severe twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome and it may be the only chance to salvage the most severe forms of congenital diaphragmatic hernia. Several other indications are currently under review and may become justified in the future, provided that diagnostic accuracy and patient selection become more accurate. Before invasive fetal intervention becomes widely accepted, however, we need to better define outcome. It is no longer acceptable to express results in terms of survival at birth. Survival at discharge and long-term morbidity must be considered as well. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Noninvasive prenatal diagnosis of fetal blood group phenotypes: current practice and future prospects

Fetuses of women with alloantibodies to RhD (D) are at risk from hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn, but only if the fetal red cells are D-positive. In such pregnancies, it is beneficial to determine fetal D type, as this will affect the management of the pregnancy. It is possible to predict, with a high level of accuracy, fetal blood group phenotypes from genotyping tests on fetal DNA. The best source is the small quantity of fetal DNA in the blood of pregnant women, as this avoids the requirement for invasive procedures of amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling (CVS). Many laboratories worldwide now provide noninvasive fetal D genotyping as a routine service for alloimmunized women, and some also test for c, E, C and K. In many countries, anti-D immunoglobulin injections are offered to D-negative pregnant women, to reduce the chances of prenatal immunization, even though up to 40% of these women will have a D-negative fetus. High-throughput, noninvasive fetal D genotyping technologies are being developed so that unnecessary treatment of pregnant women can be avoided. Trials suggest that fetal D typing of all D-negative pregnant women is feasible and should become common practice in the near future. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.