Original Articles

Abortion Rate Following Chorionic Villous Sampling and Amniocentesis in Twin Pregnancies

Abstract

Objective: Amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling (CVS) are the most widely used prenatal diagnostic methods. Despite their benefits, they can be associated with adverse pregnancy effects, but the exact prevalence of these complications especially in twin pregnancies is not exactly known. Therefore, the present study was conducted to determine post-amniocentesis or CVS complications in twin pregnancies.
Materials and methods: This retrospective observational study was conducted on 187 pregnant women who underwent amniocentesis or CVS in the perinatology department of Yas Hospital affiliated with Tehran University of Medical Sciences from January 2011 to March 2020. All participants were evaluated with amniocentesis or CVS by an expert perinatologist. The study outcomes were considered as the occurrence of vaginal bleeding, rupture of the membranes, chorioamnionitis, and abortion.
Results: The mean age of women was 33.5 ± 6.5 years. About 90 % of pregnant women underwent amniocentesis and the others underwent CVS. In 132 (70.6%) pregnant women, the most common indication for diagnostic prenatal tests was having high-risk first/second-trimester screening followed
by abnormal ultrasound anomaly scan in 31 (16.6%) cases. It was also found that in 80 (42.8%) patients, the placenta site was in the anterior part and 65 (34.8%) in the posterior part. The diagnostic test results were normal in 170 (90.4%) cases, while trisomy 21 was detected in 13 (7%) cases and trisomy 13 in 4 (2.1%) cases. The rate of abortion following CVS or amniocentesis in twin pregnancies was 3.7%, which was not associated with the study variables.
Conclusion: The results of the present study showed that the rate of miscarriage following amniocentesis and CVS in twin pregnancies is 3.7%. Therefore, reassuring the parents about the benefits of amniocentesis or CVS rather than their rare complications is necessary.

1. Choudry A, Masood S, Ahmed S. Feasibility and safety of transabdominal chorionic villus sampling. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. 2012;24(1):38-43.
2. Tchirikov M, Arnold C, Oshovskyy V, Heinrich UR, Thäle V. Three years' experience of using a 29-gauge atraumatic needle for amniocentesis. J Perinat Med. 2012;40(4):413-7.
3. Shirazi M, Rabiei M, Rahimi F, Niroomanesh S, Golshahi F, Eftekhar Yazdi M. Does Chorionic Villus Sampling Increase the Risk of Preeclampsia or Gestational Hypertension? Int J Prev Med. 2019;10:24.
4. Lau KT, Leung YT, Fung YT, Chan LW, Sahota DS, Leung NT. Outcome of 1,355 consecutive transabdominal chorionic villus samplings in 1,351 patients. Chin Med J (Engl). 2005;118(20):1675-81.
5. Golshahi F, Khaleghinezhad K, Sahebdel B, Saedi N, Salari Z. The Indications of Amniocentesis for the Diagnosis of Aneuploidy among Pregnant Women. Journal of Midwifery and Reproductive Health. 2024;12(2):4264-9.
6. Alfirevic Z, Mujezinovic F, Sundberg K. Amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling for prenatal diagnosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003;5(3): CD003252.
7. Eddleman K, Berkowitz R, Kharbutli R, Malone F, Vidaver J, Porter TF, et al. Pregnancy loss rates after midtrimester amniocentesis: the faster trial. Am J of Gynecol Obstet 2003;189(6): s111.
8. Tabor A, Philip J, Bang J, Madsen M, Obel EB, Nørgaard- Pedersen B. Needle size and risk of miscarriage after amniocentesis. Lancet. 1988;1(8578):183-4.
9. Tabor A, Vestergaard CH, Lidegaard G. Fetal loss rate after chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis: an 11- year national registry study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2009;34(1):19-24.
10. Pritchard JA, MacDonald PC, Gant NF. William’s obstetrics: Appleton-Century-Crofts New York; 1980.
11. Akolekar R, Beta J, Picciarelli G, Ogilvie C, D'Antonio F. Procedure-related risk of miscarriage following amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;45(1):16-26.
12. Salomon LJ, Sotiriadis A, Wulff CB, Odibo A, Akolekar R. Risk of miscarriage following amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling: systematic review of literature and updated meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019;54(4):442-451.
13. Odibo AO, Gray DL, Dicke JM, Stamilio DM, Macones GA, Crane JP. Revisiting the fetal loss rate after second-trimester genetic amniocentesis: a single center's 16-year experience. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111(3):589-95.
14. Odibo AO, Dicke JM, Gray DL, Oberle B, Stamilio DM, Macones GA, Crane JP. Evaluating the rate and risk factors for fetal loss after chorionic villus sampling. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;112(4):813-9.
15. Jain S, Acharya N. Fetal Wellbeing Monitoring: A Review Article. Cureus. 2022;14(9):e29039.
16. Borna S, Mirzamoradi M, Abdollahi A, Milani F, Pouransari P. Applying Maternal Serum and Amniotic Fluid CRP Concentrations, and Cervical Length to Predict Preterm Delivery. J Family Reprod Health. 2013;7(1):1-5.
17. Carbone L, Cariati F, Sarno L, Conforti A, Bagnulo F, Strina I, et al. Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing: Current Perspectives and Future Challenges. Genes (Basel). 2020;12(1):15.
18. Beta J, Zhang W, Geris S, Kostiv V, Akolekar R. Procedure-related risk of miscarriage following chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019;54(4):452-457.
19. Shirazi M, Mohseni M, Ghajarzadeh M. Complications, Indications and Results of Two Screening Methods: Amniocentesis and Chorionic Villus Sampling. Acad
J Surg. 2015;2(1-2): 23-6.
20. Movahedi M, Farahbod F, Zarean E, Hajihashemi M,
Haghollahi F, Farahmand M. Evaluation of Fetal and Maternal Outcomes in Chorion Villus Sampling (CVS). Adv Biomed Res. 2023;12:133.
21. Alfirevic Z, Sundberg K, Brigham S. Amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling for prenatal diagnosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003;(3):CD003252.
22. Niromanesh S, Mousavi Darzikolaei N, Rahimi-Shaarbaf F, Shirazi M. Pregnancy outcome in amniocentesis and chorionic villous sampling: ten- year report. Tehran Univ Med J 2016;74 (6):400-407.
23. Krispin E, Wertheimer A, Trigerman S, Ben-Haroush A, Meizner I, Wiznitzer A, et al. Single or double needle insertion in twin's amniocentesis: Does the technique influence the risk of complications? Eur
J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol X. 2019;3:100051.
24. Kamath V, Chacko MP, Kamath MS. Non-invasive Prenatal Testing in Pregnancies Following Assisted Reproduction. Curr Genomics. 2022;23(5):326-336.
25. Ghahramani F, Rezaei MA, Afrasiabi A, Nejad J. Epidemiological study of the patients referred
for thalassemia diagnosis using chorionic villous sampling (CVS) in Genetic Laboratory of Dastgheib Hospital, Shiraz, 2011. J Family Reprod Health. 2012;6(3):111-114.
26. Nasiri H, Dastan J, Seifi MH, Dalooi N, Ghaffari SR. Application of Molecular Cytogenetic Technique for Rapid Prenatal Diagnosis of Aneuploidies in Iranian Population. J Family Reprod Health. 2009;3(2):51-54.
Files
IssueVol 18, No 4 (December 2024) QRcode
SectionOriginal Articles
DOI https://doi.org/10.18502/jfrh.v18i4.17428
Keywords
Abortion Induced Prenatal Diagnosis Amniocentesis Pregnancy Twin
Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
1.
Golshahi F, Rahimi-Sharbaf F, Shirazi M, Saeedi S, Abdolrazagh Nejad A, Garfami S, Saedi N, Golshahi J, Amiriarya Z, Tavakolikia N, Sahebdel B. Abortion Rate Following Chorionic Villous Sampling and Amniocentesis in Twin Pregnancies. J Family Reprod Health. 2024;18(4):269-273.