随机比较羊膜切割和腹腔和宫外胆样本采集
S Smidt-Jensen1, M Permin, J Philip
1Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
Lancet (London, England)
|November 21, 1992
概括
跨腹腔胆样本采集 (CVS) 显示胎儿损失率较低,相比于横腹腔CVS和羊膜切割. 由于其安全性和有效性,TA CVS被推为产前诊断的首选方法.
科学领域:
- 产科和妇科 产科和妇科
- 产前诊断 在产前诊断
- 胎儿医学 胎儿医学
背景情况:
- 产前诊断方法,如胆取样 (CVS) 和羊水切割,对于识别胎儿异常至关重要.
- 将不同产前诊断程序的安全性和有效性进行比较对于优化患者护理至关重要.
研究的目的:
- 为了比较胎儿损失率和跨腹部 (TA) CVS,跨宫 (TC) CVS和第二个三个月的羊膜切割 (AC) 的程序结果.
- 根据安全性,可行性和患者的结果,确定产前诊断的最佳方法.
主要方法:
- 在两个丹麦产科中心进行了TA CVS,TC CVS和AC的随机比较.
- 在招生时分析了流行病学变量,并跟踪所有女性直到怀孕完成.
- 评估了胎儿损失率,手术后并发症 (出血,胎液泄漏) 和手术可行性.
主要成果:
- 在低遗传风险的妇女中,胎儿损失率在TA CVS (6.3%) 和AC (6.4%) 与TC CVS (10.9%) 相比显著较低.
- 在一组女性中,TA CVS在TC CVS (7.7%) 与TC CVS相比显示出较低的非故意胎儿损失率 (3.7%).
- TA CVS提供了更好的胎盘接入,并且比TC CVS更容易获得技能,与AC类似的胎儿损失风险,但没有后期损失的痛苦.
结论:
- 超腹腔CVS被推作为产前诊断的首选,因为它具有有利的胎儿损失特征,可与羊水切割相比,但痛苦较小.
- 跨宫性CVS携带更高的胎儿损失风险,并且已在研究中心中断.
- 与TC CVS相比,TA CVS是一种更安全,更有效的产前诊断程序.
相关概念视频
01:25Rapid Identification of Pathogens
MALDI-TOF MS has transformed clinical microbiology by offering a rapid and reliable method for pathogen identification. The traditional approach to microbial identification typically involves time-consuming culture techniques and biochemical tests, which can delay the initiation of appropriate antimicrobial therapy. MALDI-TOF MS avoids these delays by using characteristic ribosomal protein mass patterns of microbial cells, enabling accurate species-level identification within minutes.Principle...
01:24Automated Microbial Diagnostics
Automated diagnostic analyzers have transformed clinical microbiology by providing rapid and reliable methods for pathogen identification and antibiotic susceptibility testing. Among these systems, the Vitek 2 is widely used because it automates the traditionally labor-intensive processes of microbial identification (ID) and antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST), delivering standardized and timely results that are essential for effective patient care.Microbial Identification with ID CardsThe...