Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 4/2011

01-10-2011 | Materno-fetal Medicine

Fetal loss associated with second trimester amniocentesis

Authors: Somsri Pitukkijronnakorn, Patama Promsonthi, Panyu Panburana, Umaporn Udomsubpayakul, Apichart Chittacharoen

Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics | Issue 4/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate the fetal loss rate associated with second trimester amniocentesis.

Methods

All cases of pregnant women ≥35 years old with gestational age beyond 16 weeks between 1997 and 2006 were included in this study. The study group consisted of all cases that the patients decided to have second trimester genetic amniocentesis. The control group was a randomized selection of pregnant women who refused any procedures. The ratio of the study case to the control case was 2:1. The fetal loss rates after amniocentesis before 24, and 28 complete weeks and the pregnancy outcome were analyzed.

Results

2,990 cases in the study group and 1,495 cases in the control group were used for this analysis. The mean maternal age in the study group and control group were 36.89 ± 1.63 and 36.78 ± 1.59 years old, respectively (P = 0.239). The procedure-related fetal loss before 24 and 28 complete weeks were 0.17 and 0.50%, respectively. The most common presenting symptom before fetal loss in the study cases was abdominal pain. Almost all of the cases leading to abortion had symptoms initiated after 48 h post procedure. Significantly higher chances of abortion occurred in pregnant women ≥41 years old (P = 0.008).

Conclusion

The procedure-related fetal loss rates in pregnant women ≥35 years old after amniocentesis before 24 and 28 complete weeks were 0.17 and 0.50%, respectively. The certain factors influencing the risk of fetal loss might be independent of the amniocentesis procedure.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Seeds JW (2004) Diagnostic mid trimester amniocentesis: how safe? Am J Obstet Gynecol 191:608–616CrossRef Seeds JW (2004) Diagnostic mid trimester amniocentesis: how safe? Am J Obstet Gynecol 191:608–616CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (1995) Chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis: recommendations for prenatal counselling. MMWR Recomm Rep 44:1–12 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (1995) Chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis: recommendations for prenatal counselling. MMWR Recomm Rep 44:1–12
3.
go back to reference Valsky DV, Daum H, Yagel S (2007) Rectus sheath hematoma as a rare complication of genetic amniocentesis. J Ultrasound Med 26:371–372PubMed Valsky DV, Daum H, Yagel S (2007) Rectus sheath hematoma as a rare complication of genetic amniocentesis. J Ultrasound Med 26:371–372PubMed
4.
go back to reference American College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (2001) Prenatal diagnosis of fetal chromosomal abnormalities. ACOG Practice Bulletin 27, ACOG Washington (DC) American College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (2001) Prenatal diagnosis of fetal chromosomal abnormalities. ACOG Practice Bulletin 27, ACOG Washington (DC)
5.
go back to reference Tabor A, Philip J, Madsen M, Bang J, Obel EB, Norgaard-Pedersen B (1986) Randomizes controlled trial of genetic amniocentesis in 4606 low-risk women. Lancet 1:1287–1293PubMedCrossRef Tabor A, Philip J, Madsen M, Bang J, Obel EB, Norgaard-Pedersen B (1986) Randomizes controlled trial of genetic amniocentesis in 4606 low-risk women. Lancet 1:1287–1293PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Nanal R, Kyle P, Soothill PW (2003) A classification of pregnancy losses after invasive prenatal diagnostic procedures: an approach to allow comparison of units with a different case mix. Prenat Diagn 23:488–492PubMedCrossRef Nanal R, Kyle P, Soothill PW (2003) A classification of pregnancy losses after invasive prenatal diagnostic procedures: an approach to allow comparison of units with a different case mix. Prenat Diagn 23:488–492PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Nassar AH, Martin D, Gonzalez-Quintero VH (2004) Genetic amniocentesis complications: is the incidence overrated? Gynecol Obstet Invest 58:100–104PubMedCrossRef Nassar AH, Martin D, Gonzalez-Quintero VH (2004) Genetic amniocentesis complications: is the incidence overrated? Gynecol Obstet Invest 58:100–104PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Smidt-Jensen S, Permin M, Philip J (1992) Randomised comparison of amniocentesis and transabdominal and transcervical chorionic villus sampling. Lancet 340:1237–1244PubMedCrossRef Smidt-Jensen S, Permin M, Philip J (1992) Randomised comparison of amniocentesis and transabdominal and transcervical chorionic villus sampling. Lancet 340:1237–1244PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Kong CW, Leung TN, Leung TY, Chan LW, Sahota DS, Fung TY et al (2006) Risk factors for procedure-related fetal losses after mid-trimester genetic amniocentesis. Prenat Diagn 26:925–930PubMedCrossRef Kong CW, Leung TN, Leung TY, Chan LW, Sahota DS, Fung TY et al (2006) Risk factors for procedure-related fetal losses after mid-trimester genetic amniocentesis. Prenat Diagn 26:925–930PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Wiener JJ, Farrow A, Farrow SC (1990) Audit of amniocentesis from a district general hospital: is it worth ? BMJ 300:1243–1245PubMedCrossRef Wiener JJ, Farrow A, Farrow SC (1990) Audit of amniocentesis from a district general hospital: is it worth ? BMJ 300:1243–1245PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Roper EC, Konje JC, De Chazal R, Duckett DP, Oppenheimer CA, Taylor DJ (1999) Genetic amniocentesis: gestation-specific pregnancy outcome and comparison of outcome following early and traditional amniocentesis. Prenat Diagn 19:803–807PubMedCrossRef Roper EC, Konje JC, De Chazal R, Duckett DP, Oppenheimer CA, Taylor DJ (1999) Genetic amniocentesis: gestation-specific pregnancy outcome and comparison of outcome following early and traditional amniocentesis. Prenat Diagn 19:803–807PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Papantoniou NE, Daskalakis GJ, Tziotis JG, Kitmirides SJ, Mesogitis SA, Antsaklis AJ (2001) Risk factors predisposing to fetal loss following a second trimester amniocentasis. BJOG 108:1053–1056PubMedCrossRef Papantoniou NE, Daskalakis GJ, Tziotis JG, Kitmirides SJ, Mesogitis SA, Antsaklis AJ (2001) Risk factors predisposing to fetal loss following a second trimester amniocentasis. BJOG 108:1053–1056PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Tongsong T, Wanapirak C, Sirivatanapa P, Piyamongkol W, Sirichotiyakul S, Yampochai A (1998) Amniocentesis-related fetal loss: a cohort study. Obstet Gynecol 92:64–67PubMedCrossRef Tongsong T, Wanapirak C, Sirivatanapa P, Piyamongkol W, Sirichotiyakul S, Yampochai A (1998) Amniocentesis-related fetal loss: a cohort study. Obstet Gynecol 92:64–67PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Mungen E, Tutuncu L, Muhcu M, Yergok YZ (2006) Pregnancy outcome following second trimester amniocentesis: a case–control study. Am J Perinatol 23:25–30PubMedCrossRef Mungen E, Tutuncu L, Muhcu M, Yergok YZ (2006) Pregnancy outcome following second trimester amniocentesis: a case–control study. Am J Perinatol 23:25–30PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Odibo AO, Gray DL, Dicke JM, Stamilio DM, Macones GA, Crane JP (2008) Revisiting the fetal loss rate after second-trimester genetic amniocentesis. Obstet Gynecol 111(3):589–595PubMedCrossRef Odibo AO, Gray DL, Dicke JM, Stamilio DM, Macones GA, Crane JP (2008) Revisiting the fetal loss rate after second-trimester genetic amniocentesis. Obstet Gynecol 111(3):589–595PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Mujezinovic F, Alfirevic Z (2007) Procedure-related complications of amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling: a systemic review. Obstet Gynecol 110:687–694PubMedCrossRef Mujezinovic F, Alfirevic Z (2007) Procedure-related complications of amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling: a systemic review. Obstet Gynecol 110:687–694PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Towner D, Currier RJ, Lorey FW, Cunningham GC (2007) Miscarriage risk from amniocentesis performed for abnormal maternal serum screening. Am J Obstet Gynecol 196:608.e1–608.e5CrossRef Towner D, Currier RJ, Lorey FW, Cunningham GC (2007) Miscarriage risk from amniocentesis performed for abnormal maternal serum screening. Am J Obstet Gynecol 196:608.e1–608.e5CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Muller F, Thibaud D, Poloce F, Gelineau MC, Bernard M, Brochet C et al (2002) Risk of amniocentesis in women screened positive for Down syndrome with second trimester maternal serum markers. Prenat Diagn 22:1036–1039PubMedCrossRef Muller F, Thibaud D, Poloce F, Gelineau MC, Bernard M, Brochet C et al (2002) Risk of amniocentesis in women screened positive for Down syndrome with second trimester maternal serum markers. Prenat Diagn 22:1036–1039PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Caughey AB, Hopkins LM, Norton ME (2006) Chorionic villus sampling compared with amniocentesis and the difference in the rate of pregnancy loss. Obstet Gynecol 108:612–616PubMedCrossRef Caughey AB, Hopkins LM, Norton ME (2006) Chorionic villus sampling compared with amniocentesis and the difference in the rate of pregnancy loss. Obstet Gynecol 108:612–616PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Andreasen E, Kristoffersen K (1989) Incidence of spontaneous abortion after amniocentesis: influence of placental localization and past obstetric and gynecology history. Am J Perinatol 6:268–273PubMedCrossRef Andreasen E, Kristoffersen K (1989) Incidence of spontaneous abortion after amniocentesis: influence of placental localization and past obstetric and gynecology history. Am J Perinatol 6:268–273PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Antsaklis A, Papantoniou N, Xygakis A, Mesogitis S, Tzortzis E, Michalas S (2000) Genetic amniocentesis in women 20–34 years old: associated risks. Prenat Diagn 20:247–250PubMedCrossRef Antsaklis A, Papantoniou N, Xygakis A, Mesogitis S, Tzortzis E, Michalas S (2000) Genetic amniocentesis in women 20–34 years old: associated risks. Prenat Diagn 20:247–250PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Eddleman KA, Malone FD, Sullivan L, Dukes K, Berkowitz RL, Kharbutli Y et al (2006) Pregnancy loss rates after midtrimester amniocentesis. Obstet Gynecol 108:1067–1072PubMedCrossRef Eddleman KA, Malone FD, Sullivan L, Dukes K, Berkowitz RL, Kharbutli Y et al (2006) Pregnancy loss rates after midtrimester amniocentesis. Obstet Gynecol 108:1067–1072PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Pitukkijronnakorn S, Manonai J, Chittacharoen A (2009) Doctor’s attitudes towards invasive prenatal diagnosis. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 35:73–77PubMedCrossRef Pitukkijronnakorn S, Manonai J, Chittacharoen A (2009) Doctor’s attitudes towards invasive prenatal diagnosis. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 35:73–77PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Fetal loss associated with second trimester amniocentesis
Authors
Somsri Pitukkijronnakorn
Patama Promsonthi
Panyu Panburana
Umaporn Udomsubpayakul
Apichart Chittacharoen
Publication date
01-10-2011
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics / Issue 4/2011
Print ISSN: 0932-0067
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0711
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-010-1727-3

Other articles of this Issue 4/2011

Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 4/2011 Go to the issue