Premium
Adverse Pregnancy Outcome Following Post‐Chorionic Villus Sampling Amniocentesis Compared to Chorionic Villus Sampling
Author(s) -
Kim Sei K.,
Cho Dong J.,
Kim Jae W.,
Chung Jae E.,
Yang Young H.
Publication year - 2000
Publication title -
journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.597
H-Index - 50
eISSN - 1447-0756
pISSN - 1341-8076
DOI - 10.1111/j.1447-0756.2000.tb01313.x
Subject(s) - amniocentesis , chorionic villus sampling , medicine , obstetrics , pregnancy , gynecology , chorionic villi , prenatal diagnosis , fetus , biology , genetics
Objective: To assess the adverse pregnancy outcome of post‐chorionic villus sampling (CVS) amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling. Methods: Adverse pregnancy outcomes of 32 post‐CVS amniocentesis cases and 264 CVS only cases were compared. The base‐line characteristics were comparable in the 2 groups. Results: One (3.1%) chromosomal abnormality was detected in the post‐CVS amniocentesis group, compared to 5 (1.8%) in the CVS only group (p > 0.05). The fetal loss rate (spontaneous abortions and stillbirths) among continuing pregnancies was 3.2% in the post‐CVS amniocentesis group and 3.5% in the CVS only group (p > 0.05). No statistically significant difference was found in the incidence of neonatal death, preterm delivery, fetal growth restriction, or congenital anomalies between the 2 groups. Conclusion: Adverse pregnancy outcome occurred at a similar frequency in the post‐CVS amniocentesis group as in the CVS only group. Therefore, a subsequent amniocentesis after CVS can be considered as a safe procedure that does not introduce any additional adverse pregnancy outcome compared to that of CVS only.