Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Invasive prenatal diagnostic procedures 2005.

Mark I Evans1, Ronald J Wapner

  • 1Institute for Genetics, Mt. Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY 10022, USA. evans@compregen.com

Seminars in Perinatology
|August 18, 2005
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Health Performance in North America: An International Comparative Review of Canada and the United States with Implications for Women's Health Equity.

Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology Canada : JOGC = Journal d'obstetrique et gynecologie du Canada : JOGC·2026
Same author

Balancing How Much We Want to Know with What We Are Willing to Pay: A Comparative Cost Analysis of Prenatal Cytogenetic Testing and Screening Strategies.

Fetal diagnosis and therapy·2025
Same author

Intended vs. Actual Access to Care: Impact of Healthcare Consolidation on Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes.

Fetal diagnosis and therapy·2025
Same author

Current State of Artificial Intelligence Model Development in Obstetrics.

Obstetrics and gynecology·2025
Same author

Reconceptualizing Intrauterine Resuscitation and Its Short-Term Impact.

Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)·2025
Same author

Reframing antepartum and intrapartum surveillance.

Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology·2024

Prenatal diagnostic procedures like amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling (CVS) have similar risks (around 1/200) when performed by experts. However, first-trimester CVS is safer, while early amniocentesis may increase risks of limb defects.

Area of Science:

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology
  • Prenatal Diagnostics
  • Medical Procedures

Background:

  • Amniocentesis and Chorionic Villus Sampling (CVS) are established prenatal diagnostic methods.
  • Significant variability exists in procedure utilization, operator skill, and risk counseling, impacting patient choices.
  • Published data on procedure risks and outcomes show considerable variation.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To critically evaluate the risks associated with amniocentesis and CVS.
  • To compare the safety and efficacy of these two common prenatal diagnostic procedures.
  • To clarify the actual observed risks versus quoted risks for amniocentesis and CVS.

Main Methods:

  • Compilation and analysis of published data on amniocentesis and CVS.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Review of studies comparing the risks of CVS and amniocentesis in skilled hands.
  • Examination of data regarding procedure-related risks, including limb reduction defects and Talipes.

    • Main Results:

    • The compiled data suggest amniocentesis carries a risk of approximately 1/200, potentially lower in highly skilled hands.
    • Chorionic Villus Sampling (CVS) in experienced hands also shows risks around 1/200, with studies finding equivalency to amniocentesis.
    • No robust studies support claims of amniocentesis risks as low as 1/1000. Early amniocentesis is linked to an increased risk of Talipes, while CVS at 10 weeks or later shows no increased risk of limb defects.

    Conclusions:

    • In experienced hands, amniocentesis and CVS demonstrate comparable procedural risks.
    • First-trimester CVS is identified as the safer procedure compared to early amniocentesis.
    • Accurate risk counseling is crucial due to variations in operator skill and observed procedure risks.