Chorionic villus sampling: 10 years of experience in a University referral center

• Autor(a) principal: Martins, Ana Teresa
• Data de Publicação: 2020
• Outros Autores: Francisco, Carla, Correia, Hildeberto, Cohen, Álvaro
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
• Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10400.18/7655
• topic: Abortion, Spontaneous; Adult; Chorionic Villi Sampling; Corneal Dystrophies, Hereditary; Female; Fetal Death; Genetic Testing; Hospitals, University; Humans; Karyotype; Nuchal Translucency Measurement; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Trimester, First; Prenatal Diagnosis; Retrospective Studies; Risk; Doenças Genéticas

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to estimate our center-specific CVS-related miscarriage rate. Methods: This is an observational retrospective study of women submitted to a CVS in our hospital, between January 1st, 2007 and December 31st, 2016. Maternal and pregnancy characteristics, procedure details, genetic results and pregnancy outcomes of all patients were collected. The FMF miscarriage risk algorithm was used to estimate our population expected risk of miscarriage. To establish the procedure-related risk of miscarriage, we compared the observed with the expected miscarriage rate. Results: We had a total number of 1523 women with a singleton pregnancy who did a CVS over the 10-year period. The mean maternal age was 34 years old; the majority of the women was Caucasian, multiparous and had a spontaneous pregnancy. The most common indication for CVS was a high-risk result in the 1st trimester combined screening test. The karyotype was normal in 72,7% of cases, 11,1% were T21 and 7,2% were T13 or T18. In the study group, 33 women were diagnosed with a fetal demise, 435 had a TOP and there were 4 intrauterine deaths and 34 miscarriages. The rate of miscarriage in our population was 3,2% and the expected patient specific risk for miscarriage was 3,0%. There was no statistical significance between the two miscarriage rates p = 0,705. Conclusion: In our study the risk of miscarriage in the CVS group was not significantly different from that the expected patient specific risk (3.2 % vs 3%, p = 0.7). The procedure-related risk of miscarriage was 0,2%, similar to the rates describe in the literature. An accurate risk of pregnancy loss should be used when counseling women for CVS to allow an informed decision.