Risk factors for procedure‐related fetal losses after mid‐trimester genetic amniocentesis
- 9 October 2006
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Prenatal Diagnosis
- Vol. 26 (10) , 925-930
- https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.1528
Abstract
Background The objective of this study was to determine the institutional pregnancy loss rate following second-trimester genetic amniocentesis and to ascertain whether factors exist which would identify pregnancies at increased risk of having a procedure-related fetal loss. Setting University Teaching Hospital Methods Details of the procedure and pregnancy outcome of all patients who had amniocentesis planned or performed between 15–22 gestational weeks between January 1997 and June 2004 were extracted from our clinical audit database. The procedure-related fetal loss rate, defined as all unintended abortions, stillbirths and neonatal deaths without major fetal abnormalities or obvious obstetric causes, was determined and compared to a presumed background fetal loss rate of 0.8% based on a cohort of women who did not undergo the procedure. Results A total of 3468 consecutive amniocentesis were performed in 3440 patients with 3498 fetuses. The mean gestational age at amniocentesis was 17.6 ± 1.2 weeks. The majority (98.6%) required only one puncture and a transplacental procedure was required in 2.7% cases. A total of 3465 chromosomal studies were performed. Sixty six cases (1.9%) of major chromosomal abnormalities were detected. Pregnancy outcome was ascertained in all except 26 singleton pregnancies (0.74%). There were 3285 (93.9%) livebirths, 103 (2.9%) termination of pregnancies (TOP), 6 (0.17%) fetal demises before the procedure, and 20 (0.61%) unintended fetal losses due to significant fetal abnormalities or obstetric complications. The remaining 58 fetal losses (1.66%) were classified as potentially procedure-related, which could be either background fetal losses or procedure-related. The procedure-related fetal loss rate after correcting for the background loss rate was 0.86%. Potentially procedure-related fetal losses were found to be significantly associated with a procedure at 18 weeks or beyond (odds ratio OR = 1.97), a procedure performed for abnormal second-trimester biochemical screening test (OR = 3.08), a bloody tap (OR = 6.48), and a female fetus (OR = 2.39); but not to the number of punctures (p = 0.66) nor transplacental amniocentesis (p = 0.104). Conclusions Mid-trimester amniocentesis is associated with a small but significant risk of fetal loss of 0.86%. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Keywords
This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit:
- Diagnostic mid trimester amniocentesis: How safe?American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2004
- Genetic Amniocentesis Complications: Is the Incidence Overrated?Gynecologic and Obstetric Investigation, 2004
- A classification of pregnancy losses after invasive prenatal diagnostic procedures: an approach to allow comparison of units with a different case mixPrenatal Diagnosis, 2003
- Five-year experience with midtrimester amniocentesis performed by a single group of obstetricians-gynecologists at a community hospitalAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2002
- Risk factors predisposing to fetal loss following a second trimester amniocentesisBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 2001
- A single physician's experience with four thousand six hundred genetic amniocentesesAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2001
- Fetal Sex as a Risk Factor for Fetal Distress Leading to Abdominal DeliveryAustralian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1996
- Randomised comparison of amniocentesis and transabdominal and transcervical chorionic villus samplingThe Lancet, 1992
- Audit of amniocentesis from a district general hospital: is it worth it?BMJ, 1990
- RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL OF GENETIC AMNIOCENTESIS IN 4606 LOW-RISK WOMENPublished by Elsevier ,1986