Amniocentesis and Risk of Fetal Loss in Dichorionic-Diamniotic Twin Pregnancy: A Case-Control Study.

IF 2.7 2区 医学 Q2 GENETICS & HEREDITY Prenatal Diagnosis Pub Date : 2025-03-18 DOI:10.1002/pd.6777
Sofia Roero, Agata Ingala, Silvana Arduino, Carlotta Bossotti, Simona Bastonero, Francesca Maria Comoglio, Ilaria Dusini, Annasilvia Pertusio, Roberto Scali, Simona Sdei, Alberto Revelli, Andrea Sciarrone
{"title":"Amniocentesis and Risk of Fetal Loss in Dichorionic-Diamniotic Twin Pregnancy: A Case-Control Study.","authors":"Sofia Roero, Agata Ingala, Silvana Arduino, Carlotta Bossotti, Simona Bastonero, Francesca Maria Comoglio, Ilaria Dusini, Annasilvia Pertusio, Roberto Scali, Simona Sdei, Alberto Revelli, Andrea Sciarrone","doi":"10.1002/pd.6777","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>There is a paucity of data regarding the risk of fetal loss due to invasive prenatal diagnosis in twins. The aim of the present study is to assess the rate of amniocentesis-related fetal loss in uncomplicated dichorionic-diamniotic (DCDA) twin pregnancies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective observational case-control study. DCDA twin pregnancies undergoing amniocentesis between January 2010 and December 2023 formed the case group. The control group comprised counterparts who did not undergo amniocentesis. The primary outcome of the study was procedure-related fetal loss. Secondary outcomes were miscarriage rate, overall fetal loss and gestational age at birth.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our dataset included 220 and 662 women in the case and control groups, respectively. No difference in the primary outcome was found: procedure-related fetal loss of one fetus was 0.9% in the case group and 1.1% in the control group, and of both fetuses it was 0.5% in both groups (p = 0.982). No difference was found in secondary outcomes: the fetal loss rate of one fetus was 1.8% in the case group and 2.1% in the control group, while that of both fetuses it was 0.5% and 0.8% respectively (p = 0.853). Multivariate analysis confirmed the nonsignificant effect of amniocentesis on the risk of fetal loss.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Amniocentesis does not seem to increase the risk of fetal loss in uncomplicated DCDA twin pregnancies above the baseline risk of loss among twin gestations.</p>","PeriodicalId":20387,"journal":{"name":"Prenatal Diagnosis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Prenatal Diagnosis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.6777","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: There is a paucity of data regarding the risk of fetal loss due to invasive prenatal diagnosis in twins. The aim of the present study is to assess the rate of amniocentesis-related fetal loss in uncomplicated dichorionic-diamniotic (DCDA) twin pregnancies.

Methods: Retrospective observational case-control study. DCDA twin pregnancies undergoing amniocentesis between January 2010 and December 2023 formed the case group. The control group comprised counterparts who did not undergo amniocentesis. The primary outcome of the study was procedure-related fetal loss. Secondary outcomes were miscarriage rate, overall fetal loss and gestational age at birth.

Results: Our dataset included 220 and 662 women in the case and control groups, respectively. No difference in the primary outcome was found: procedure-related fetal loss of one fetus was 0.9% in the case group and 1.1% in the control group, and of both fetuses it was 0.5% in both groups (p = 0.982). No difference was found in secondary outcomes: the fetal loss rate of one fetus was 1.8% in the case group and 2.1% in the control group, while that of both fetuses it was 0.5% and 0.8% respectively (p = 0.853). Multivariate analysis confirmed the nonsignificant effect of amniocentesis on the risk of fetal loss.

Conclusion: Amniocentesis does not seem to increase the risk of fetal loss in uncomplicated DCDA twin pregnancies above the baseline risk of loss among twin gestations.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Prenatal Diagnosis
Prenatal Diagnosis 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
13.30%
发文量
204
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Prenatal Diagnosis welcomes submissions in all aspects of prenatal diagnosis with a particular focus on areas in which molecular biology and genetics interface with prenatal care and therapy, encompassing: all aspects of fetal imaging, including sonography and magnetic resonance imaging; prenatal cytogenetics, including molecular studies and array CGH; prenatal screening studies; fetal cells and cell-free nucleic acids in maternal blood and other fluids; preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD); prenatal diagnosis of single gene disorders, including metabolic disorders; fetal therapy; fetal and placental development and pathology; development and evaluation of laboratory services for prenatal diagnosis; psychosocial, legal, ethical and economic aspects of prenatal diagnosis; prenatal genetic counseling
期刊最新文献
Can Fetal Heterotaxy Syndrome Be Diagnosed Through Prenatal Ultrasound in the First Trimester (GA 11+0-13+6 Weeks)? Amniocentesis and Risk of Fetal Loss in Dichorionic-Diamniotic Twin Pregnancy: A Case-Control Study. 'When Lightning Strikes Twice'-Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Two Indications in One Biopsy. Digital PCR Assay Utilizing In-Droplet Methylation-Sensitive Digestion for Estimation of Fetal cfDNA From Plasma. Improving the Performance of Prenatal Cell-Free DNA Screening Through Size-Selective Fetal DNA Enrichment in a Cohort of 71,986 General and High-Risk Pregnancies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1