These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Sampling success and risk by transabdominal chorionic villus sampling, transcervical chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis: a randomized study.
    Author: Smidt-Jensen S, Permin M, Philip J.
    Journal: Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 1991 Mar 01; 1(2):86-90. PubMed ID: 12797080.
    Abstract:
    A total of 3347 women were randomized to either transabdominal chorionic villus sampling, transcervical chorionic villus sampling or amniocentesis. Unless induced or spontaneous abortion had occurred, they had all completed up to 28 weeks of pregnancy at the time of analysis. No significant difference was seen between total fetal loss in the transabdominal chorionic villus sampling group and the amniocentesis group (6.2% and 6.6%, respectively, SE difference 0.92%, p = 0.01). The total fetal loss in the transcervical group was 10.1%. When the number of failed procedures and those cases which were evaluated as infeasible for the assigned method, are compared, the overall sampling efficacy is less good transcervically than transabdominally. After pooling our data with data from the Canadian randomized study and the American non-randomized study, the difference in risk between transcervical chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis was 2.1%, SE difference = 0.64%, p = 0.8.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]