1992
DOI: 10.1016/0140-6736(92)92946-d
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Randomised comparison of amniocentesis and transabdominal and transcervical chorionic villus sampling

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

13
88
1
10

Year Published

1996
1996
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 175 publications
(112 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
13
88
1
10
Order By: Relevance
“…However, operators must be skilled in both methods. Both techniques appear to be comparably efficient between 8 and 12 weeks, when the overall success rate after two sampling device insertions is considered to be very near to 100% (Philip et al,2004).This efficiency has been confirmed in three national randomized trials of transabdominal vs.transcervical CVS (Brambati et al,1991;Jackson et al,1992;Smidt-Jensen et al,1992). Although the data appear to confirm that the two techniques are equally effective in obtaining adequate amounts of chorionic tissue, transabdominal needling entailed a significantly smaller proportion of repeated device insertions (3.3 vs. 10.3%) and of low weight specimens (3.2 vs. 4.9%).…”
Section: Transcervical Versus Transabdominal Chorionic Villus Samplingmentioning
confidence: 62%
“…However, operators must be skilled in both methods. Both techniques appear to be comparably efficient between 8 and 12 weeks, when the overall success rate after two sampling device insertions is considered to be very near to 100% (Philip et al,2004).This efficiency has been confirmed in three national randomized trials of transabdominal vs.transcervical CVS (Brambati et al,1991;Jackson et al,1992;Smidt-Jensen et al,1992). Although the data appear to confirm that the two techniques are equally effective in obtaining adequate amounts of chorionic tissue, transabdominal needling entailed a significantly smaller proportion of repeated device insertions (3.3 vs. 10.3%) and of low weight specimens (3.2 vs. 4.9%).…”
Section: Transcervical Versus Transabdominal Chorionic Villus Samplingmentioning
confidence: 62%
“…[120][121][122] However, this has not been a universal conclusion. 123 A recent meta-analysis of 3 randomized controlled trials comparing first-trimester CVS and midtrimester amniocentesis concluded that pregnancy loss was slightly more common after CVS (odds ratio, 1.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-1.52).…”
Section: Is Earlier Diagnosis Important?mentioning
confidence: 95%
“…17,18 The success of cytogenetic diagnosis is slightly lower for CVS versus amniocentesis. In particular, CVS is associated with an increased frequency of placental mosaicism, which is a cytogenetic abnormality detected in the CVS sample but not found in the fetus or newborn.…”
Section: Cvsmentioning
confidence: 99%