119 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22402484)
1. Utilization of available prenatal screening and diagnosis: effects of the California screen program.
Blumenfeld YJ; Taylor J; Lee HC; Hudgins L; Sung JF; El-Sayed YY
J Perinatol; 2012 Dec; 32(12):907-12. PubMed ID: 22402484
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Uptake of noninvasive prenatal testing at a large academic referral center.
Larion S; Warsof SL; Romary L; Mlynarczyk M; Peleg D; Abuhamad AZ
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2014 Dec; 211(6):651.e1-7. PubMed ID: 24954652
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Is nuchal translucency screening associated with different rates of invasive testing in an older obstetric population?
Chasen ST; McCullough LB; Chervenak FA
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2004 Mar; 190(3):769-74. PubMed ID: 15042012
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. National decline in invasive prenatal diagnostic procedures in association with uptake of combined first trimester and cell-free DNA aneuploidy screening.
Robson SJ; Hui L
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol; 2015 Oct; 55(5):507-10. PubMed ID: 26259499
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Nuchal translucency and the acceptance of invasive prenatal chromosomal diagnosis in women aged 35 and older.
Zoppi MA; Ibba RM; Putzolu M; Floris M; Monni G
Obstet Gynecol; 2001 Jun; 97(6):916-20. PubMed ID: 11384696
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The impact of utilization of early aneuploidy screening on amniocenteses available for training in obstetrics and fetal medicine.
Rose NC; Lagrave D; Hafen B; Jackson M
Prenat Diagn; 2013 Mar; 33(3):242-4. PubMed ID: 23354826
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Nuchal translucency screening: how do women actually utilize the results?
Caughey AB; Musci TJ; Belluomini J; Main D; Otto C; Goldberg J
Prenat Diagn; 2007 Feb; 27(2):119-23. PubMed ID: 17152116
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. First-trimester screening for trisomy 21 in twin pregnancy: does the addition of biochemistry make an improvement?
Goncé A; Borrell A; Fortuny A; Casals E; Martínez MA; Mercadé I; Cararach V; Vanrell JA
Prenat Diagn; 2005 Dec; 25(12):1156-61. PubMed ID: 16231401
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Are age cutoffs still used to identify candidates for invasive testing for chromosomal abnormalities?
Wasden SW; Adams BN; Chasen ST
J Reprod Med; 2011; 56(3-4):113-6. PubMed ID: 21542527
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [Prenatal diagnosis of chromosome aberrations after implementation of screening for Down's syndrome].
Kjaergaard S; Hahnemann JM; Skibsted L; Jensen LN; Sperling L; Zingenberg H; Kristiansen A; Brøndum-Nielsen K
Ugeskr Laeger; 2008 Mar; 170(14):1152-6. PubMed ID: 18405480
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Fetal chromosomal abnormalities: antenatal screening and diagnosis.
Anderson CL; Brown CE
Am Fam Physician; 2009 Jan; 79(2):117-23. PubMed ID: 19178062
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Association of combined first-trimester screen and noninvasive prenatal testing on diagnostic procedures.
Larion S; Warsof SL; Romary L; Mlynarczyk M; Peleg D; Abuhamad AZ
Obstet Gynecol; 2014 Jun; 123(6):1303-1310. PubMed ID: 24807333
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Prenatal diagnosis and multiple pregnancy.
Cleary-Goldman J; D'Alton ME; Berkowitz RL
Semin Perinatol; 2005 Oct; 29(5):312-20. PubMed ID: 16360490
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Chromosomal microarray as primary diagnostic genomic tool for pregnancies at increased risk within a population-based combined first-trimester screening program.
Vogel I; Petersen OB; Christensen R; Hyett J; Lou S; Vestergaard EM
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2018 Apr; 51(4):480-486. PubMed ID: 28608362
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Chorionic villus sampling compared with amniocentesis and the difference in the rate of pregnancy loss.
Caughey AB; Hopkins LM; Norton ME
Obstet Gynecol; 2006 Sep; 108(3 Pt 1):612-6. PubMed ID: 16946222
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. First-trimester and second-trimester screening at a community hospital: experience from the first year of implementation.
Philipson EH; Callahan M; Jelovsek JE
Obstet Gynecol; 2008 Aug; 112(2 Pt 1):218-22. PubMed ID: 18669714
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [Invasive prenatal diagnosis in the Netherlands, 1991-2000: number of procedures, indications and abnormal results detected].
Nagel HT; Knegt AC; Kloosterman MD; Wildschut HI; Leschot NJ; Vandenbussche FP
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2004 Jul; 148(31):1538-43. PubMed ID: 15366724
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Gradual implementation of first trimester screening in a population with a prior screening strategy: population based cohort study.
Calda P; Sípek A; Gregor V
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2010 Aug; 89(8):1029-33. PubMed ID: 20524903
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Stepwise sequential aneuploidy screening in clinical practice.
Wax JR; Cartin A; Smith D; Smith R; Chard R; Carpenter M; Pinette MG
J Clin Ultrasound; 2012 Jan; 40(1):26-30. PubMed ID: 22102396
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Prenatal genetic screening.
Burgin KB
J Midwifery Womens Health; 2008; 53(4):391-2. PubMed ID: 18586193
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
