Difference in Procedure-Related Risk of Miscarriage between Early and Mid-Trimester Amniocentesis: A Retrospective Cohort Study

被引:7
作者
Steinfort, Kelly [1 ]
Van Houtven, Ellen [1 ]
Jacquemyn, Yves [1 ,2 ]
Blaumeiser, Bettina [3 ]
Loquet, Philip [4 ]
机构
[1] ASTARC Antwerp Univ, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Antwerp Univ Hosp, UZA, B-2610 Antwerp, Belgium
[2] Antwerp Univ Hosp, Dept Global Hlth, UZA, B-2610 Antwerp, Belgium
[3] Univ Antwerp, Dept Med Genet, UZA, Antwerp Univ Hosp, B-2610 Antwerp, Belgium
[4] St Augustinus Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, B-2610 Antwerp, Belgium
关键词
early amniocentesis; mid-trimester amniocentesis; prenatal diagnosis; miscarriage; procedure-related fetal loss; pregnancy loss; PRENATAL-DIAGNOSIS; TRIAL;
D O I
10.3390/diagnostics11061098
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Early amniocentesis (EA)-before 15 gestational weeks-is not recommended because of a high rate of miscarriages. Most studies performed amniocentesis at very early stages of pregnancy (11-13 weeks of gestational age). However, amniocentesis performed at 14 gestational weeks could be an important alternative to mid-trimester amniocentesis (MA) because it shortens the time period between the screening (non-invasive prenatal test (NIPT)) and the diagnostic test (amniocentesis). This study aimed to compare the procedure-related risk of miscarriage between MA (15 + 0 to 17 + 6 weeks of gestational age) and EA (14 + 0-6 weeks of gestational age). This is a multicentric, retrospective cohort study from 1 January 2007 to 21 November 2018, comparing the MA to the EA cohort. Procedure-related fetal loss is defined as spontaneous abortion occurring within 4 weeks of the procedure. Multiple gestations, amniocenteses performed after 17 or before 14 weeks, indications other than prenatal genetic diagnoses and procedures performed by less experienced gynaecologists were excluded. Complete outcome data were available for 1107 out of 1515 women (73.1%): 809 (69.9%) in the MA and 298 (83.2%) in the EA cohort. No significant difference was found (EA 0.82% vs. MA 0.36%; p = 0.646). The difference was 0.46% (odds ratio = 0.673; 95% confidence interval = 0.123-3.699). This study found no significant difference in the procedure-related risk of miscarriage when EA was compared to MA. EA might be considered a safe alternative, though further research is necessary.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 18 条
[1]   Procedure-related risk of miscarriage following amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling: a systematic review and meta-analysis [J].
Akolekar, R. ;
Beta, J. ;
Picciarelli, G. ;
Ogilvie, C. ;
D'Antonio, F. .
ULTRASOUND IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2015, 45 (01) :16-26
[2]  
Alfirevic Z, 2010, R COLL OBSTET GYNAEC, V8, P2
[3]  
Ghi T, 2016, ULTRASOUND OBST GYN, V48, P26, DOI [10.1002/uog.15969, 10.1002/uog.15945]
[4]   What invasive procedure to use in early pregnancy? [J].
Jauniaux, E ;
Pahal, GS ;
Rodeck, CH .
BEST PRACTICE & RESEARCH CLINICAL OBSTETRICS & GYNAECOLOGY, 2000, 14 (04) :651-662
[5]  
Johnson JM, 1999, PRENATAL DIAG, V19, P732, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0223(199908)19:8<732::AID-PD624>3.0.CO
[6]  
2-N
[7]  
Loquet P.F.A, 1991, P 1 WORLD C ULTR OBS
[8]   Procedure-related complications of amniocentesis and chorionic villous sampling - A systematic review [J].
Mujezinovic, Faris ;
Alfirevic, Zarko .
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2007, 110 (03) :687-694
[9]  
Norton ME, 2016, OBSTET GYNECOL, V127, pE108, DOI 10.1097/AOG.0000000000001405
[10]   Late first-trimester invasive prenatal diagnosis: Results of an international randomized trial [J].
Philip, J ;
Silver, RK ;
Wilson, RD ;
Thom, EA ;
Zachary, JM ;
Mohide, P ;
Mahoney, MJ ;
Simpson, JL ;
Platt, LD ;
Pergament, E ;
Hershey, D ;
Filkins, K ;
Johnson, A ;
Shulman, LP ;
Bang, J ;
MacGregor, S ;
Smith, JR ;
Shaw, D ;
Wapner, RJ ;
Jackson, LG .
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2004, 103 (06) :1164-1173