Article

642 Amniocentesis for twin pregnancies: Is alpha-fetoprotein useful in confirming that the two sacs were sampled?

University of British Columbia - Vancouver, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy (Impact Factor: 2.3). 02/2007; 22(3):221-5. DOI: 10.1159/000098722
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To assess if amniotic fluid alpha-fetoprotein (AFAFP) could be useful to determine if both sacs are sampled during an amniocentesis for twin pregnancies.
We reviewed all amniocenteses performed on twin pregnancies over a 5-year period. Inclusion criteria were restricted to pregnancies where both karyotypes and AFAFP were available on each fetus. Pregnancies complicated by fetal anomalies were excluded. The following information was obtained: maternal age, gestational age at the procedure, karyotypes, AFAFP values, pregnancy and neonatal outcome. Placental pathology reports were used to confirm chorionicity. Analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of the fetal gender and chorionicity on the AFAFP values.
260 pregnancies were reviewed. Mean maternal age was 36.9 years (33.6, 40.1). Gestational age at the time of the procedure was 16.2 weeks (14.5, 17.9). Complications included 1.8% of misdiagnosis (discrepancy between karyotype and gender). The difference of AFAFP values between the two fetuses was statistically larger in dichorionic pregnancies than in monochorionic gestations. Fetal gender had no influence on the AFAFP.
Amniocentesis in twin pregnancies is associated with a 1.8% risk of misdiagnosis. AFAFP can help to assess the chorionicity of a twin pregnancy. When the difference between the two values is <0.2 MoM and the chorionicity was thought to be dichorionic and the two karyotypes are similar, then failure to sample both sacs should be suspected.

0 Followers
 · 
71 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The rate of twin pregnancies in the United States has stabilized at 32 per 1000 births in 2006. Aside from determining chorionicity, first-trimester screening and second-trimester ultrasound scanning should ascertain whether there are structural or chromosomal abnormalities. Compared with singleton births, genetic amniocentesis-related loss at <24 weeks of gestation for twin births is higher (0.9% vs 2.9%, respectively). Selective termination for an anomalous fetus is an option, although the pregnancy loss rate is 7% at experienced centers. For singleton and twin births for African American and white women, approximately 50% of preterm births are indicated; approximately one-third of these births are spontaneous, and 10% of the births occur after preterm premature rupture of membranes. From 1989-2000, the rate of preterm twin births increased, for African American and white women alike, although the perinatal mortality rate has actually decreased. As with singleton births, tocolytics should be used judiciously and only for a limited time (<48 hours) in twin births. Administration of antenatal corticosteroids is an evidence-based recommendation.
    American journal of obstetrics and gynecology 10/2010; 203(4):305-15. DOI:10.1016/j.ajog.2010.04.031 · 3.97 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Prenatal screening for aneuploidy has changed significantly over the last 30 years, from being age-based to maternal serum and ultrasound based techniques. Multiple pregnancies present particular challenges with regards to screening as serum-based screening techniques are influenced by all feti while ultrasound-based techniques can be fetus specific. Tests currently available tend to not perform as well in multiple compared to singleton pregnancies. Considerations must be given to these variations when discussing and performing screening for aneuploidy in this situation. Prenatal invasive diagnosis techniques in multiple pregnancies bring their own challenges from a technical and counselling point of view, in particular with regards to sampling error, mapping and assignment of results and management of abnormal results. This review addresses these particular challenges and provides information to facilitate care.
    Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology 01/2013; DOI:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2013.12.010 · 3.00 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Prenatal screening and diagnosis are integral to antenatal care worldwide. Prospective parents are offered screening for common fetal chromosomal and structural congenital malformations. In most developed countries, prenatal screening is routinely offered in a package that includes ultrasound scan of the fetus and the assay in maternal blood of biochemical markers of aneuploidy. Mistakes can arise at any point of the care pathway for fetal screening and diagnosis, and may involve individual or corporate systemic or latent errors. Special clinical circumstances, such as maternal size, fetal position, and multiple pregnancy, contribute to the complexities of prenatal diagnosis and to the chance of error. Clinical interventions may lead to adverse outcomes not caused by operator error. In this review I discuss the scope of the errors in prenatal diagnosis, and highlight strategies for their prevention and diagnosis, as well as identify areas for further researchandstudyto enhance patient safety.
    Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology 05/2013; 27(4). DOI:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2013.04.007 · 3.00 Impact Factor