Procedure related risk of premature delivery and fetal growth reduction following amniocentesis, transcervical and transabdominal chorionic villus sampling: a retrospective study.
amniocentesis
chorionic villus sampling
fetal growth restriction
placental disruption
premature delivery
premature rupture of membranes
transcervical
Journal
Journal of perinatal medicine
ISSN: 1619-3997
Titre abrégé: J Perinat Med
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 0361031
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
25 Oct 2019
25 Oct 2019
Historique:
received:
20
05
2019
accepted:
04
08
2019
pubmed:
11
9
2019
medline:
3
3
2020
entrez:
11
9
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Background The aim of this study was to compare transabdominal and transcervical chorionic villus sampling (CVS) as well as amniocentesis (AC) with respect to their rates of premature delivery and fetal growth restriction. Methods We retrospectively evaluated the mentioned procedures of invasive prenatal testing performed in a single center between 2001 and 2016. Seven hundred and ninety-nine cases of AC and 719 cases of CVS were included, of which 400 were performed transvaginally. Only singleton pregnancies with a normal karyotype and delivery after 24 + 0 weeks of gestation were included. Fetal growth restriction was defined as birth weight below the 10th percentile. Premature delivery was defined as delivery before 37 + 0 weeks of gestation. Data were compared to a control group without an invasive procedure. Results The frequency of premature delivery was 8.5% after transabdominal CVS, 6.3% after transcervical CVS and 10.5% after AC as compared to 10.8% in the control group. The frequency of fetal growth restriction was 8.2% after transabdominal CVS 6.8% after transcervical CVS and 8.4% after AC as compared to 9.7% in the control group. Conclusion Our study supports that the three different methods of invasive prenatal testing do not lead to a higher risk of either premature delivery or fetal growth restriction when compared to controls. We found no difference in risk profile among the three techniques.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31503543
doi: 10.1515/jpm-2019-0291
pii: jpm-2019-0291
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
811-816Références
Alfirevic Z, Sundberg K, Brigham S. Amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling for prenatal diagnosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003:CD003252.
Alfirevic Z, Navaratnam K, Mujezinovic F. Amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling for prenatal diagnosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;9:CD003252.
Ekelund CK, Jørgensen FS, Petersen OB, Sundberg K, Tabor A. Impact of a new national screening policy for Down’s syndrome in Denmark: population-based cohort study. Br Med J 2008;337:a2547.
Collins SL, Impey L. Prenatal diagnosis: types and techniques. Early Hum Dev 2012;88:3–8.
Niederstrasser SL, Hammer K, Möllers M, Falkenberg MK, Schmidt R, Steinhard J, et al. Fetal loss following invasive prenatal testing: a comparison of transabdominal chorionic villus sampling, transcervical chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis. J Perinat Med 2017;45:193–8.
Sotiriadis A, Eleftheriades M, Chatzinikolaou F, Chatzistamatiou K, Assimakopoulos E, Chasiakos D. Fetal growth impairment after first-trimester chorionic villus sampling: a case-control study. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2016;29:1731–5.
Wieacker P, Steinhard J. The prenatal diagnosis of genetic diseases. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2010;107:857–62.
Silver RK, Wilson RD, Philip J, Thom EA, Zachary JM, Mohide P, et al. Late first-trimester placental disruption and subsequent gestational hypertension/preeclampsia. Obstet Gynecol 2005;105:587–92.
Stergiotou I, Borobio V, Bennasar M, Goncé A, Mula R, Nuruddin M, et al. Transcervical chorionic villus sampling: a practical guide. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2016;29:1244–51.
Beck S, Wojdyla D, Say L, Betran AP, Merialdi M, Requejo JH, et al. The worldwide incidence of preterm birth: a systematic review of maternal mortality and morbidity. Bull World Health Organ 2010;88:31–8.
Räisänen S, Gissler M, Saari J, Kramer M, Heinonen S. Contribution of risk factors to extremely, very and moderately preterm births – register-based analysis of 1,390,742 singleton births. PLoS One 2013;8:e60660.
Cederholm M, Haglund B, Axelsson O. Maternal complications following amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling for prenatal karyotyping. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2003;110: 392–9.
Wax JR, Davies NP, Watson WJ, Cartin A, Pinette MG, Chard R, et al. Pain associated with chorionic villus sampling: transabdominal vs transcervical approach. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009;201:400.e1–3.
Csaba A, Bush MC, Saphier C. How painful are amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling? Prenat Diagn 2006;26: 35–8.
Smidt-Jensen S, Philip J, Lundsteen C, Permin M, Zachary JM, Fowler SE. Randomised comparison of amniocentesis and transabdominal and transcervical chorionic villus sampling. Lancet 1992;340:1237–44.
Tabor A, Vestergaard CHF, Lidegaard Ø. Fetal loss rate after chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis: an 11-year national registry study. Ultrasound Obst Gyn 2009;34:19–24.