Home Medicine Comparison of adverse perinatal outcomes after single-needle and double-needle CVS techniques
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Comparison of adverse perinatal outcomes after single-needle and double-needle CVS techniques

  • Cenk Gezer EMAIL logo , Atalay Ekin , Gokhan Goynumer , Kaan Pakay , Hicran Acar , Ulas Solmaz , Cuneyt Eftal Taner and Mehmet Ozeren
Published/Copyright: June 8, 2016
Journal of Perinatal Medicine
From the journal Journal of Perinatal Medicine Volume 45 Issue 2

Abstract

Objective:

To determine the impact of the chorion villus sampling (CVS) technique on adverse perinatal outcomes.

Methods:

In this case-control study, 412 women who underwent CVS at 11–14 weeks of gestation and 231 women who did not undergo any invasive procedure were retrospectively evaluated. The women in the CVS group were further divided into two groups according to the use of single-needle technique (n=148) vs. double-needle technique (n=264). The adverse outcomes were compared between controls and the two CVS groups, and regression analysis was used to determine the significance of independent contribution.

Results:

The rate of preeclampsia for the control group was 2.2%, for the double-needle group was 3% and for the single-needle group was 8.1%. CVS with single-needle technique was found to be an independent and statistically significant risk factor for preeclampsia [odds ratio (OR)=2.1, 95% confidence interval (CI); 1.4–2.7, P=0.008].

Conclusion:

The risk of preeclampsia after CVS appears to be increased with single-needle technique compared with double-needle technique.

Keywords: chorion villus sampling; double-needle; preeclampsia; single-needle
Corresponding author: Cenk Gezer, MD, Department of Perinatology, Tepecik Training and Research Hospital, Gaziler St, No: 468, 35120 Izmir, Turkey, Tel.: +90 532 523 9130, Fax: +90 232 457 96 51

References

[1] Basaran A, Basaran M, Topatan B. Chorionic villus sampling and the risk of preeclampsia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2011;283:1175–81.10.1007/s00404-011-1840-ySearch in Google Scholar PubMed

[2] Kollmann M, Haeusler M, Haas J, Csapo B, Lang U, Klaritsch P. Procedure-related complications after genetic amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling. Ultraschall Med. 2013;34:345–8.10.1055/s-0032-1312939Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[3] Farina A. Nonabortal pregnancy complications of chorionic villous sampling. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2011;23:129–34.10.1097/GCO.0b013e3283445789Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[4] Alfirevic Z, Sundberg K, Brigham S. Amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling for prenatal diagnosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003;3:CD003252.10.1002/14651858.CD003252Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[5] Young C, von Dadelszen P, Alfirevic Z. Instruments for chorionic villus sampling for prenatal diagnosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;1:CD000114.10.1002/14651858.CD000114.pub2Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[6] Grobman WA, Auger M, Shulman LP, Elias S. The association between chorionic villus sampling and preeclampsia. Prenat Diagn. 2009;29:800–3.10.1002/pd.2296Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[7] Adusumalli J, Han CS, Beckham S, Bartholomew ML, Williams J III. Chorionic villus sampling and risk for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;196:591.e1–7.10.1016/j.ajog.2007.03.015Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[8] Odibo AO, Singla A, Gray DL, Dicke JM, Oberle B, Crane J. Is chorionic villus sampling associated with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy? Prenat Diagn. 2010;30:9–13.10.1002/pd.2410Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[9] Lindgren P, Cederholm M, Haglund B, Axelsson O. Invasive procedures for fetal karyotyping: no cause of subsequent gestational hypertension or pre-eclampsia. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 2010;117:1422–5.10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02665.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

[10] Khalil A, Akolekar R, Syngelaki A, Penco JM, Nicolaides KH. Effect of chorionic villus sampling on uterine artery Doppler. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2010;28:9–13.10.1159/000315295Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[11] Wilson ML, Goodwin TM, Pan VL, Ingles SA. Molecular epidemiology of preeclampsia. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2003;58:39–66.10.1097/00006254-200301000-00022Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[12] Tabor A, Alfirevic Z. Update on procedure-related risks for prenatal diagnosis techniques. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2010;27:1–7.10.1159/000271995Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[13] Reid KP, Gurrin LC, Dickinson Newnham JP, Phillips JM. Pregnancy loss rates following second trimester genetic amniocentesis. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1999;39:281–5.10.1111/j.1479-828X.1999.tb03397.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

[14] Silver RK, Wilson RD, Philip J, Thom EA, Zachary JM, Mohide P, et al. NICHD EATA Trial Group. Late first-trimester placental disruption and subsequent gestational hypertension/preeclampsia. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;105:587–92.10.1097/01.AOG.0000152343.08096.c3Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[15] McKeeman GC, Ardill JE, Caldwell CM, Hunter AJ, McClure N. Soluble vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-1 (sFlt-1) is increased throughout gestation in patients who have preeclampsia develop. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191:1240–6.10.1016/j.ajog.2004.03.004Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[16] 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;45:16–26.10.1097/OGX.0000000000000214Search in Google Scholar

  1. The authors stated that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this article.

Received: 2015-10-23
Accepted: 2016-5-9
Published Online: 2016-6-8
Published in Print: 2017-2-1

©2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Editorial
  3. Fetal diagnosis and therapy: a continously evolving discipline
  4. Highlight articles
  5. Prenatally diagnosed fetal tumors of the head and neck: a systematic review with antenatal and postnatal outcomes over the past 20 years
  6. Prenatal screening for microcephaly: an update after three decades
  7. Fetal echocardiography: reference values for the Chinese population
  8. Multi-fetal pregnancy reduction (MFPR) to twins or singleton – medical justification and ethical slippery slope
  9. Combined screening test for trisomy 21 – is it as efficient as we believe?
  10. Fetal loss following invasive prenatal testing: a comparison of transabdominal chorionic villus sampling, transcervical chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis
  11. Comparison of adverse perinatal outcomes after single-needle and double-needle CVS techniques
  12. Prenatal decision-making in the second and third trimester in trisomy 21-affected pregnancies
  13. Role of collagen type IV in the pathogenesis of increased prenasal thickness in Down syndrome fetuses: sonographic and immunohistological findings
  14. Congenital diaphragmatic hernia: endotracheal fluid phospholipidic profile following tracheal occlusion in an experimental model
  15. Original articles
  16. The effect of intraumbilical fetal nutrition via a subcutaneously implanted port system on amino acid concentration by severe IUGR human fetuses
  17. Anti-inflammatory Elafin in human fetal membranes
  18. Recombinant vascular endothelial growth factor 121 injection for the prevention of fetal growth restriction in a preeclampsia mouse model
  19. Estimation of fetal weight by ultrasonography after preterm premature rupture of membranes: comparison of different formulas
  20. Congress Calendar
  21. Congress Calendar
https://doi.org/10.1515/jpm-2015-0360
Keywords for this article
chorion villus sampling; double-needle; preeclampsia; single-needle

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Editorial
  3. Fetal diagnosis and therapy: a continously evolving discipline
  4. Highlight articles
  5. Prenatally diagnosed fetal tumors of the head and neck: a systematic review with antenatal and postnatal outcomes over the past 20 years
  6. Prenatal screening for microcephaly: an update after three decades
  7. Fetal echocardiography: reference values for the Chinese population
  8. Multi-fetal pregnancy reduction (MFPR) to twins or singleton – medical justification and ethical slippery slope
  9. Combined screening test for trisomy 21 – is it as efficient as we believe?
  10. Fetal loss following invasive prenatal testing: a comparison of transabdominal chorionic villus sampling, transcervical chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis
  11. Comparison of adverse perinatal outcomes after single-needle and double-needle CVS techniques
  12. Prenatal decision-making in the second and third trimester in trisomy 21-affected pregnancies
  13. Role of collagen type IV in the pathogenesis of increased prenasal thickness in Down syndrome fetuses: sonographic and immunohistological findings
  14. Congenital diaphragmatic hernia: endotracheal fluid phospholipidic profile following tracheal occlusion in an experimental model
  15. Original articles
  16. The effect of intraumbilical fetal nutrition via a subcutaneously implanted port system on amino acid concentration by severe IUGR human fetuses
  17. Anti-inflammatory Elafin in human fetal membranes
  18. Recombinant vascular endothelial growth factor 121 injection for the prevention of fetal growth restriction in a preeclampsia mouse model
  19. Estimation of fetal weight by ultrasonography after preterm premature rupture of membranes: comparison of different formulas
  20. Congress Calendar
  21. Congress Calendar
Sign up now to receive a 20% welcome discount
Institutional Access
How does access work?
Have an idea on how to improve our website?
Please write us.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Downloaded on 31.12.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/jpm-2015-0360/html
Scroll to top button