Login to MyKarger

New to MyKarger? Click here to sign up.

Login with Facebook

Forgot Password? Reset your password

Authors, Editors, Reviewers

For Manuscript Submission, Check or Review Login please go to Submission Websites List.

Submission Websites List

Institutional Login (Shibboleth)

For the academic login, please select your country in the dropdown list. You will be redirected to verify your credentials.

Table of Contents
Vol. 27, No. 1, 2010
Issue release date: January 2010
Section title: Mini-Review
Free Access
Fetal Diagn Ther 2010;27:1–7
(DOI:10.1159/000271995)

Update on Procedure-Related Risks for Prenatal Diagnosis Techniques

Tabor A.a · Alfirevic Z.b
aDepartment of Fetal Medicine, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet and Faculty of Health Sciences, Copenhagen, Denmark; bDivision of Perinatal and Reproductive Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool Women’s Hospital, Liverpool, UK
email Corresponding Author

Ann Tabor

Department of Fetal Medicine, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet

Blegdamsvej 9

DK–2100 Copenhagen (Denmark)

Tel. +45 3545 0610, Fax +45 3545 4749, E-Mail ann.tabor@rh.regionh.dk

Do you have an account?

Login Information





Contact Information










I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.



Abstract

Introduction: As a consequence of the introduction of effective screening methods, the number of invasive prenatal diagnostic procedures is steadily declining. The aim of this review is to summarize the risks related to these procedures. Material and Methods: Review of the literature. Results: Data from randomised controlled trials as well as from systematic reviews and a large national registry study are consistent with a procedure-related miscarriage rate of 0.5–1.0% for amniocentesis as well as for chorionic villus sampling (CVS). In single-center studies performance may be remarkably good due to very skilled operators, but these figures cannot be used for general counselling. Amniocentesis performed prior to 15 weeks had a significantly higher miscarriage rate than CVS and mid-trimester amniocentesis, and also increased the risk of talipes equinovarus. Amniocentesis should therefore not be performed before 15 + 0 weeks’ gestation. CVS on the other hand should not be performed before 10 weeks’ gestation due to a possible increase in risk of limb reduction defects. Discussion: Experienced operators have a higher success rate and a lower complication rate. The decreasing number of prenatal invasive procedures calls for quality assurance and monitoring of operators’ performance.

© 2009 S. Karger AG, Basel


Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview
Abstract of Mini-Review

Received: November 02, 2009
Accepted: November 13, 2009
Published online: December 24, 2009
Issue release date: January 2010

Number of Print Pages: 7
Number of Figures: 0
Number of Tables: 1

ISSN: 1015-3837 (Print)
eISSN: 1421-9964 (Online)

For additional information: http://www.karger.com/FDT


Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.