Chorionic villus sampling: First trimester prenatal diagnosis

1986 ◽  
Vol 53 (6) ◽  
pp. 747-759 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allan T. Bombard ◽  
Joe Leigh Simpson ◽  
Sherman Elias ◽  
Alice O. Martin
2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcos Cordoba ◽  
Stephanie Andriole ◽  
Shara M. Evans ◽  
David Britt ◽  
Melissa Chu Lam ◽  
...  

Objectives: The explosion in genetic technologies, including array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH), has increased the complexity of genetic counseling. We now offer chorionic villus sampling (CVS) and aCGH to all first-trimester patients, as this allows the prenatal diagnosis of an additional 1% of anomalies not otherwise detectable and can detect genetic copy number variants at a much higher resolution than conventional cytogenetics. Here, we explored some of the determinants of how patients are deciding to use or not use this new technology and evaluate risk-benefit analyses for that decision. Methods: This is a retrospective case-control study of singleton and multiples pregnancies at our center. Those having aCGH testing along with CVS were defined as ‘testers' and those who declined aCGH but had the CVS were ‘nontesters'. Results: Demographic data of 181 educated women who chose CVS were compared. Among those carrying singletons (n = 144), older women, defined as over 35 years of age (or ‘advanced maternal age'; AMA), were more likely to choose the aCGH than younger women. Further, women who had a prior history of genetic testing and who wanted to know the gender of the fetus were more likely to choose the aCGH test. In women carrying multiples (n = 37), AMA ceases to be a predictor of choice. Having had prior genetic counseling remains a strong predictor for choosing aCGH, as does wanting to know the gender of the fetus. Neither prior abortions nor having prior children were significant for women carrying singletons or multiples. Conclusion: Offering pregnant couples an individualized choice regarding aCGH seems an appropriate approach. There are discrete patterns associated with the choice of taking the aCGH that varied depending on whether the patient was carrying a singleton or multiples.


1993 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 144-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lee P. Shulman ◽  
Joe Leigh Simpson ◽  
Sherman Elias ◽  
Richard E. Felker ◽  
Donald S. Emerson ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Panos Antsaklis ◽  
Aris Antsaklis ◽  
Michael Sindos ◽  
Fotodotis M Malamas

ABSTRACT Chorionic villus sampling (CVS) is the method of choice for first trimester invasive prenatal diagnosis. In expert hands, it is nowadays considered as safe as amniocentesis and has the advantage of an earlier diagnosis. In this review, we describe the technique of the procedure, its indications and contraindications and the requirements concerning adequate training and optimum clinical practice. We also discuss issues concerning the safety of the procedure in singleton and multiple pregnancies, other complications and controversies, such as the association with limb reduction defects and pre-eclampsia, as well as diagnostic problems and dilemmas, such as maternal cell contamination and confined placental mosaicism. We also describe new and promising methods of non-invasive diagnosis, based on the isolation and analysis of fetal cells or cell-free fetal genetic material from the maternal circulation, that aim to replace the invasive methods of prenatal diagnosis in the future. How to cite this article Sindos M, Malamas FM, Antsaklis P, Antsaklis A. Invasive Prenatal Diagnosis: Chorionic Villus Sampling. Donald School J Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015; 9(3):293-306.


1989 ◽  
Vol 160 (4) ◽  
pp. 879-886 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sherman Elias ◽  
Joe Leigh Simpson ◽  
Lee P. Shulman ◽  
Donald Emerson ◽  
Avirachan Tharapel ◽  
...  

1985 ◽  
Vol 152 (2) ◽  
pp. 204-213 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sherman Elias ◽  
Joe Leigh Simpson ◽  
Alice O. Martin ◽  
Rudy E. Sabbagha ◽  
Albert B. Gerbie ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document