Choose your font:
 Arimo
 Merriweather
 Mukta Malar
 Open Sans Condensed
 Rokkitt
 Source Sans Pro
 Login


 English 
 Français 
 Português 

[Valid RSS] RSS
bar

Database - Alliance francophone pour l'accouchement respecté (AFAR)

Description of this bibliographical database (AFAR website)
Currently 3046 records
YouTube channel (tutorial)

https://afar.info/id=868

Created on : 27 Jul 2004
Modified on : 27 Dec 2007

 Modify this record
Do not follow this link unless you know an editor’s password!


Share: Facebook logo   Tweeter logo   Hard

Bibliographical entry (without author) :

Amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling for prenatal diagnosis. Cochrane Review. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003;(3):CD003252.

Author(s) :

Alfirevic Z, Sundberg K, Brigham S.

Year of publication :

2003

URL(s) :

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=…

Résumé (français)  :

Abstract (English)  :

BACKGROUND: A major disadvantage of second trimester amniocentesis is that the result is usually available only after 18 weeks’ gestation. Chorionic villus sampling (CVS) and early amniocentesis can be done between 9 and 14 weeks and offer an earlier alternative.

OBJECTIVES: The objective was to assess comparative safety and accuracy of second trimester amniocentesis, early amniocentesis, transcervical and transabdominal CVS.

SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register (March 2003) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2002).

SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised trials comparing amniocentesis and CVS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers assessed eligibility and trial quality and performed data extraction. We analysed the data using RevMan software.

MAIN RESULTS: A total of 14 randomised studies have been included. In a low risk population with a background pregnancy loss of around 2%, a second trimester amniocentesis will increase this risk by another 1%. This difference did not reach statistical significance, but the increase in spontaneous miscarriages following second trimester amniocentesis compared with controls (no amniocentesis) did (2.1% versus 1.3%; relative risk (RR) 1.02 to 2.52). Early amniocentesis is not a safe early alternative to second trimester amniocentesis because of increased pregnancy loss (7.6% versus 5.9%; RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.61) and higher incidence of talipes compared to CVS (1.8% versus 0.2%; RR 6.43, 95% CI 1.68 to 24.64).Compared with second trimester amniocentesis, transcervical CVS carries a significantly higher risk of pregnancy loss (14.5% versus 11%; RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.81) and spontaneous miscarriage (12.9% versus 9.4%; RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.11). One study compared transabdominal CVS with second trimester amniocentesis and found no significant difference in the total pregnancy loss between the two procedures (6.3% versus 7%). Transcervical CVS is more technically demanding than transabdominal CVS with more failures to obtain sample and more multiple insertions.

REVIEWER’S CONCLUSIONS: Second trimester amniocentesis is safer than transcervical CVS and early amniocentesis. If earlier diagnosis is required, transabdominal CVS is preferable to early amniocentesis or transcervical CVS. In circumstances where transabdominal CVS may be technically difficult the preferred options are transcervical CVS in the first trimester or second trimester amniocentesis.

Sumário (português)  :

Comments :

Argument (français) :

L’amniocentèse au 2nd trimestre augmente le risque de fausse-couches de 1%, mais est moins risquée qu’au 1er trimestre.

Argument (English):

Argumento (português):

Keywords :

➡ evidence-based medicine/midwifery ; amniocentesis ; screening ; miscarriage ; trisomy

Author of this record :

Cécile Loup — 27 Jul 2004

Discussion (display only in English)
 
➡ Only identified users



 I have read the guidelines of discussions and I accept all terms (read guidelines)

barre

New expert query --- New simple query

Creating new record --- Importing records

User management --- Dump database --- Contact

bar

This database is managed by Alliance francophone pour l'accouchement respecté (AFAR, https://afar.info)
affiliated with Collectif interassociatif autour de la naissance (CIANE, https://ciane.net).
It is fed by the voluntary contributions of persons interested in the sharing of scientific data.
If you agree with this project, you can support us in several ways:
(1) contributing to this database if you have a minimum training in documentation
(2) or financially supporting AFAR (see below)
(3) or joining the AFAR (or another society affiliated with CIANE).
Sign in or create an account to follow changes or become an editor.
Contact afar.association(arobase)gmail.com for more information.

Valid CSS! Valid HTML!
Donating to AFAR (click “Faire un don”) will help us to maintain and develop sites and public
databases towards the support of parents and caregivers’ informed decisions with respect to childbirth