Randomised study of risk of fetal loss related to early amniocentesis versus chorionic villus sampling

作者: K Sundberg , J Bang , S Smidt-Jensen , V Brocks , C Lundsteen

DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(97)02449-5

关键词:

摘要: Summary Background Several cohort studies have shown the feasibility of early amniocentesis (between 11 and 13 weeks gestation) as an alternative to chorionic villus sampling (CVS) for karyotyping, but only completed randomised study fetal safety showed a significant fetal-loss risk related first-trimester amniocentesis. We assessed in CVS. Methods at 11–13 weeks' gestational age compared with associated CVS 10–12 weeks. 1160 pregnant women were randomly assigned one procedure (581 amniocentesis, 579 CVS) after baseline ultrasound examination 10 gestation followed up until birth. Total loss neonatal morbidity primary outcome measures. Sampling success pregnancy complications secondary outcomes. used filter increase cell yield amniotic-fluid samples. was transabdominal. Findings found significantly increased occurrence talipes equinovarus group (p Interpretation Even though numbers small, we association between equinovarus. believe this be true, since it supports trend similar study. Our results show that when done technique, is abortion CVS, although limited size our population reduced strength conclusion.

参考文章(32)
E. L. Kaplan, Paul Meier, Nonparametric Estimation from Incomplete Observations Springer Series in Statistics. ,vol. 53, pp. 319- 337 ,(1992) , 10.1007/978-1-4612-4380-9_25
D. H. Ledbetter, J. M. Zachary, J. L. Simpson, M. S. Golbus, E. Pergament, L. Jackson, M. J. Mahoney, R. J. Desnick, J. Schulman, K. L. Copeland, Y. Verlinsky, T. Yang-Feng, S. A. Schonberg, A. Babu, A. Tharapel, A. Dorfmann, H. A. Lubs, G. G. Rhoads, S. E. Fowler, F. De La Cruz, Cytogenetic results from the U.S. Collaborative Study on CVS. Prenatal Diagnosis. ,vol. 12, pp. 317- 345 ,(1992) , 10.1002/PD.1970120503
Jo-Ann M. Johnson, Douglas Wilson, Elizabeth J.T. Winsor, Joel Singer, Jerome Dansereau, Dagmar K. Kalousek, The Early Amniocentesis Study: A Randomized Clinical Trial of Early Amniocentesis versus Midtrimester Amniocentesis Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy. ,vol. 11, pp. 85- 93 ,(1996) , 10.1159/000264285
H.V. Firth, P.A. Boyd, R.H. Lindenbaum, S.M. Huson, P. Chamberlain, I.Z. Mackenzie, Severe limb abnormalities after chorion villus sampling at 56-66 days' gestation The Lancet. ,vol. 337, pp. 762- 763 ,(1991) , 10.1016/0140-6736(91)91374-4
Claudio Giorlandino, Luisa Mobili, Elena Bilancioni, Paoloa D'alessio, Ornella Carcioppolo, Paolo Gentili, Antonio Vizzone, Transplacental amniocentesis: Is it really a higher‐risk procedure? Prenatal Diagnosis. ,vol. 14, pp. 803- 806 ,(1994) , 10.1002/PD.1970140907
B. Rafael Elejalde, Maria M. de Elejalde, Juan M. Acuña, Diana Thelen, Carlos Trujillo, Michael Karrmann, Prospective study of amniocentesis performed between weeks 9 and 16 of gestation: Its feasibility, risks, complications and use in early genetic prenatal diagnosis American Journal of Medical Genetics. ,vol. 35, pp. 188- 196 ,(1990) , 10.1002/AJMG.1320350210
Ann Tabor, Mette Madsen, ErikB. Obel, John Philip, Jens Bang, BentNør Gaard-Pedersen, RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL OF GENETIC AMNIOCENTESIS IN 4606 LOW-RISK WOMEN The Lancet. ,vol. 327, pp. 1287- 1293 ,(1986) , 10.1016/S0140-6736(86)91218-3
S. Smidt-Jensen, J. Philip, C. Lundsteen, M. Permin, J.M. Zachary, S.E. Fowler, Randomised comparison of amniocentesis and transabdominal and transcervical chorionic villus sampling. The Lancet. ,vol. 340, pp. 1237- 1244 ,(1992) , 10.1016/0140-6736(92)92946-D
Frederick W. Hanson, Frances Tennant, Stacy Hune, Karen Brookhyser, Early amniocentesis: Outcome, risks, and technical problems at ≤ 12.8 weeks American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. ,vol. 166, pp. 1707- 1711 ,(1992) , 10.1016/0002-9378(92)91560-W
PETER J. THOMPSON, ANNE GREENOUGH, KYPROS H. NICOLAIDES, Lung volume measured by functional residual capacity in infants following first trimester amniocentesis or chorion villus sampling. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. ,vol. 99, pp. 479- 482 ,(1992) , 10.1111/J.1471-0528.1992.TB13785.X