Advertisement

Invasive Pränataldiagnostik

  • Annegret Geipel
Chapter

Zusammenfassung

Vor mehr als 40 Jahren erschienen die ersten Berichte über eine erfolgreiche Chromosomendiagnostik aus angezüchteten Fruchtwasserzellen. Seit Beginn der siebziger Jahre wurde die pränatale Chromosomendiagnostik in zahlreichen Labors als Routineverfahren etabliert und stellt auch heute noch den Hauptanteil der durchgeführten pränatalen Analysen dar (Kap. 27, Genetik). Dabei ist die Amniozentese im II. Trimenon das weltweit am häufigsten eingesetzte Punktionsverfahren. Üblicherweise liegen die Ergebnisse erst nach der 16. SSW vor, sodass die Chorionzottenbiopsie (″chorionic villous sampling″, CVS) als alternative Punktionsart für das I. Trimenon entwickelt wurde.

Literatur

  1. Agarwal K, Alfirevic Z (2011) Pregnancy loss after chorionic villus sampling and genetic amniocentesis in twin pregnancies – a systematic review. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol Nov 28. doi: 10.1002/uog.10152. [Epub ahead of print]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alfirevic Z, Pilu G (2009) Antibiotic prophylaxis for amniocentesis. Prenat Diagn 29:1094CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alfirevic Z, Sundberg K, Brigham S (2003) Amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling for prenatal diagnosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev CD003252:Google Scholar
  4. Athanasiadis AP, Pantazis K, Goulis DG, Chatzigeorgiou K, Vaitsi V, Assimakopoulos E, Tzevelekis F, Tsalikis T, Bontis JN (2009) Comparison between 20G und 22G needle for second trimester amniocentesis in terms of technical aspects and short-term complications. Prenat Diagn 29:761–765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brambati B, Tului L (2005) Chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 17:197–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Caughey AB, Hopkins LM, Norton ME (2006) Chorionic villus sampling compared with amniocentesis and the difference in the rate of pregnancy loss. Obstet Gynecol 108:612–616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cederholm M, Haglund B, Axelsson O (2005) Infant morbidity following amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling for prenatal karyotyping. BJOG 112:394–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eddleman KA, Malone FD, Sullivan L, Dukes K, Berkowitz RL, Kharbutli Y, Porter TF, Luthy DA, Comstock CH, Saade GR, Klugman S, Dugoff L, Craigo SD, Timor-Tritsch IE, Carr SR, Wolfe HM, D’Alton ME (2006) Pregnancy loss rates after midtrimester amniocentesis. Obstet Gynecol 108:1067–1072CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fassihi H, McGrath JA (2010) Prenatal diagnosis of epidermolysis bullosa. Dermatol Clin 28:231–237 (viii)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ferrazzi E (2010) Antibiotic prophylaxis before second-trimester genetic amniocentesis. Prenat Diagn 30:189–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Geipel A, Daiss T, Katalinic A, Germer U, Kohl T, Krapp M, Gembruch U, Berg C (2007) Changing attitudes towards non-invasive aneuploidy screening at advanced maternal age in a German tertiary care center. Ultraschall Med 28:67–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ghidini A, Sepulveda W, Lockwood CJ, Romero R (1993) Complications of fetal blood sampling. Am J Obstet Gynecol :1339–1344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Giorlandino C, Cignini P, Cini M, Brizzi C, Carcioppolo O, Milite V, Coco C, Gentili P, Mangiafico L, Mesoraca A, Bizzoco D, Gabrielli I, Mobili L (2009) Antibiotic prophylaxis before second-trimester genetic amniocentesis (APGA): a single-centre open randomised controlled trial. Prenat Diagn 29:606–612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gramellini D, Fieni S, Casilla G, Raboni S, Nardelli GB (2007) Mid-trimester amniocentesis and antibiotic prophylaxis. Prenat Diagn 27:956–959CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Grobman WA, Auger M, Shulman LP, Elias S (2009) The association between chorionic villus sampling and preeclampsia. Prenat Diagn 29:800–803CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hagen A, Entezami M, Gasiorek-Wiens A, Albig M, Becker R, Knoll U, Stumm M, Wegner RD (2011) The impact of first trimester screening and early fetal anomaly scan on invasive testing rates in women with advanced maternal age. Ultraschall Med 32:302–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jenkins TM, Wapner RJ (2000) The challenge of prenatal diagnosis in twin pregnancies. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 12:87–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Karasahin E, Alanbay I, Ercan M, Yenen MC, Dede M, Baser I (2009) Simple, cheap, practical and efficient amniocentesis training model made with materials found in every obstetrics clinic. Prenat Diagn 29:1069–1070CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kasperski SB, Brennan AM, Corteville JE, Finkel RS, Golden J, Johnson MP, Wilson RD (2008) Utility of fetal muscle biopsy for diagnosis of nemaline myopathy. Fetal Diagn Ther 24:400–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Khalil A, Akolekar R, Pandya P, Syngelaki A, Nicolaides K (2010) Chorionic villus sampling at 11 to 13 weeks of gestation and hypertensive disorders in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 116:374–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kong CW, Leung TN, Leung TY, Chan LW, Sahota DS, Fung TY, Lau TK (2006) Risk factors for procedure-related fetal losses after mid-trimester genetic amniocentesis. Prenat Diagn 26:925–930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kozlowski P, Knippel A, Stressig R (2008) Individual risk of fetal loss following routine second trimester amniocentesis: a controlled study of 20460 cases. Ultraschall Med 29:165–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kulkarni ML, Vengalath S (1995) Prenatal diagnosis of genetic disorders. Indian Pediatr 32:1229–1238PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Lam CW, Sin SY, Lau ET, Lam YY, Poon P, Tong SF (2000) Prenatal diagnosis of glycogen storage disease type 1b using denaturing high performance liquid chromatography. Prenat Diagn 20:765–768CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Liao C, Wei J, Li Q, Li L, Li J, Li D (2006) Efficacy and safety of cordocentesis for prenatal diagnosis. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 93:13–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lichtenbelt KD, Alizadeh BZ, Scheffer PG, Stoutenbeek P, Schielen PC, Page-Christiaens LC, Schuring-Blom GH (2011) Trends in the utilization of invasive prenatal diagnosis in The Netherlands during. Prenat Diagn 31:765–772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lo YM (2009) Noninvasive prenatal detection of fetal chromosomal aneuploidies by maternal plasma nucleic acid analysis: a review of the current state of the art. BJOG 116:152–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Luu M, Cantatore-Francis JL, Glick SA (2010) Prenatal diagnosis of genodermatoses: current scope and future capabilities. Int J Dermatol 49:353–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mandelbrot L, Jasseron C, Ekoukou D, Batallan A, Bongain A, Pannier E, Blanche S, Tubiana R, Rouzioux C, Warszawski J (2009) ANRS French Perinatal Cohort (EPF). Amniocentesis and mother-to-child human immunodeficiency virus transmission in the Agence Nationale de Recherches sur le SIDA et les Hépatites Virales French Perinatal Cohort. Am J Obstet Gynecol 200:160.e1–160.e9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Müngen E, Tütüncü L, Muhcu M, Yergök YZ (2006) Pregnancy outcome following second-trimester amniocentesis: a case-control study. Am J Perinatol 23:25–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mujezinovic F, Alfirevic Z (2007) Procedure-related complications of amniocentesis and chorionic villous sampling: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol 110:687–694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Muller F, Thibaud D, Poloce F, Gelineau MC, Bernard M, Brochet C, Millet C, Rèal JY, Dommergues M (2002) Risk of amniocentesis in women screened positive for Down syndrome with second trimester maternal serum markers. Prenat Diagn 22:1036–1039CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Murotsuki J, Uehara S, Okamura K, Yajima A, Oura T, Miyabayashi S (1994) Fetal liver biopsy for prenatal diagnosis of carbamoyl phosphate synthetase deficiency. Am J Perinatol 11:160–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Nadel AS, Likhite ML (2009) Impact of first-trimester aneuploidy screening in a high-risk population. Fetal Diagn Ther 26:29–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nevo Y, Shomrat R, Yaron Y, Orr-Urtreger A, Harel S, Legum C (1999) Fetal muscle biopsy as a diagnostic tool in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Prenat Diagn 19:921–926CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nicolaides K, Brizot Mde L, Patel F, Snijders R (1994) Comparison of chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis for fetal karyotyping at 10–13 weeks’ gestation. Lancet 344:435–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nicolini U, Spelzini F (2001) Invasive assessment of fetal renal abnormalities: urinalysis, fetal blood sampling and biopsy. Prenat Diagn 21:964–969CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Nizard J (2010) Amniocentesis: technique and education. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 22:152–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Nizard J, Duyme M, Ville Y (2002) Teaching ultrasound-guided invasive procedures in fetal medicine: learning curves with and without an electronic guidance system. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 19:274–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Odibo AO, Dicke JM, Gray DL, Oberle B, Stamilio DM, Macones GA, Crane JP (2008) Evaluating the rate and risk factors for fetal loss after chorionic villus sampling. Obstet Gynecol b 112:813–819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Odibo AO, Gray DL, Dicke JM, Stamilio DM, Macones GA, Crane JP (2008) Revisiting the fetal loss rate after second-trimester genetic amniocentesis: a single center’s 16-year experience. Obstet Gynecol a 111:589–595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Odibo AO, Singla A, Gray DL, Dicke JM, Oberle B, Crane J (2010) Is chorionic villus sampling associated with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy? Prenat Diagn 30:9–13PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Papantoniou N, Daskalakis G, Anastasakis E, Marinopoulos S, Mesogitis S, Antsaklis A (2008) Increasing the noninvasive management of rhesus isoimmunization. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 101:281–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Papantoniou NE, Daskalakis GJ, Tziotis JG, Kitmirides SJ, Mesogitis SA, Antsaklis AJ (2001) Risk factors predisposing to fetal loss following a second trimester amniocentesis. BJOG 108:1053–1056PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Philip J, Silver RK, Wilson RD, Thom EA, Zachary JM, Mohide P, Mahoney MJ, Simpson JL, Platt LD, Pergament E, Hershey D, Filkins K, Johnson A, Shulman LP, Bang J, MacGregor S, Smith JR, Shaw D, Wapner RJ, Jackson LD, NICHD EATA Trial Group (2004) Late first-trimester invasive prenatal diagnosis: results of an international randomized trial. Obstet Gynecol 103:1164–1173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Quintero R, Hale-Burnett E, Bornick PW, Gilbert-Barness E (2007) Fetal laryngoscopy and lung biopsy in a case of bilateral lethal congenital cystic adenomatoid malformation of the lung. Fetal Pediatr Pathol 26:229–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Rochon M, Stone J (2003) Invasive procedures in multiple gestations. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 15:167–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (2010) Amniocentesis and chorion villous sampling, Green-top Guideline No 8Google Scholar
  49. Shimizu A, Akiyama M, Ishiko A, Yoshiike T, Suzumori K, Shimizu H (2005) Prenatal exclusion of harlequin ichthyosis potential pitfalls in the timing of the fetal skin biopsy. Br J Dermatol 153:811–814CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tabor A, Alfirevic Z (2010) Update on procedure-related risks for prenatal diagnosis techniques. Fetal Diagn Ther 27:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Tabor A, Philip J, Madsen M, Bang J, Obel EB, Nørgaard-Pedersen B (1986) Randomised controlled trial of genetic amniocentesis in 4606 low-risk women. Lancet 1:1287–1293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Tabor A, Vestergaard CH, Lidegaard (2009) Fetal loss rate after chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis: an 11-year national registry study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 34:19–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tangshewinsirikul C, Wanapirak C, Piyamongkol W, Sirichotiyakul S, Tongsong T (2011) Effect of cord puncture site in cordocentesis at mid-pregnancy on pregnancy outcomes. Prenat Diagn 10:1002–2790Google Scholar
  54. The Canadian Early and Mid-trimester Amniocentesis Trial (CEMAT) Group (1998) Randomised trial to assess safety and fetal outcome of early and midtrimester amniocentesis. Lancet 351:242–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Tongprasert F, Srisupundit K, Luewan S, Phadungkiatwattana Pranpanus S, Tongson T (2010) Midpregnancy cordocentesis training of maternal-fetal medicine fellows. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 36:65–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Tongsong T, Wanapirak C, Kunavikatikul C, Sirichotiyakul S, Piyamongkol W, Chanprapaph P (2000) Cordocentesis at 16–24 weeks of gestation: experience of 1,320 cases. Prenat Diagn 20:224–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Tongsong T, Wanapirak C, Sirivatanapa P, Piyamongkol W, Sirichotiyakul S, Yampochai A (1998) Amniocentesis-related fetal loss: a cohort study. Obstet Gynecol 92:64–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Vestergaard C, Lidegaard , Tabor A (2009) Invasive prenatal diagnostic practice in Denmark 1996 to 2006. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 88:362–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Ville Y, Cooper M, Revel A, Frydman R, Nicolaides KH (1995) Development of a training model for ultrasound-guided invasive procedures in fetal medicine. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 5:180–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Annegret Geipel
    • 1
  1. 1.Abt. für Geburtshilfe und Pränatale MedizinUniversitätsklinikum Bonn, Zentrum für Geburtshilfe und FrauenheilkundeBonnDeutschland

Personalised recommendations