The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Update on Procedure-Related Risks for Prenatal Diagnosis Techniques
Open accessAbstract
Introduction: As a consequence of the introduction of effective screening methods, the number of invasive prenatal diagnostic procedures is steadily declining. The aim of this review is to summarize the risks related to these procedures. Material and Methods: Review of the literature. Results: Data from randomised controlled trials as well as from systematic reviews and a large national registry study are consistent with a procedure-related miscarriage rate of 0.5–1.0% for amniocentesis as well as for chorionic villus sampling (CVS). In single-center studies performance may be remarkably good due to very skilled operators, but these figures cannot be used for general counselling. Amniocentesis performed prior to 15 weeks had a significantly higher miscarriage rate than CVS and mid-trimester amniocentesis, and also increased the risk of talipes equinovarus. Amniocentesis should therefore not be performed before 15 + 0 weeks’ gestation. CVS on the other hand should not be performed before 10 weeks’ gestation due to a possible increase in risk of limb reduction defects. Discussion: Experienced operators have a higher success rate and a lower complication rate. The decreasing number of prenatal invasive procedures calls for quality assurance and monitoring of operators’ performance.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Boyd, P., DeVigan, C., Khoshnood, B., Loane, M., Garne, E., Dolk, H., & EUROCAT working group (2008) · BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology · doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2008.01700.x · Cited by 335
Cited by
Palomaki, G. E., Kloza, E. M., Lambert-Messerlian, G. M., Haddow, J. E., Neveux, L. M., Ehrich, M., van den Boom, D., Bombard, A. T., Deciu, C., Grody, W. W., et al. (2011) · Genetics in Medicine · doi:10.1097/gim.0b013e3182368a0e · Cited by 939
Delayed childbearing: effects on fertility and the outcome of pregnancy
Balasch, J., & Gratacós, E. (2012) · Current Opinion in Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/gco.0b013e3283517908 · Cited by 253
Chitty, L. S., Wright, D., Hill, M., Verhoef, T. I., Daley, R., Lewis, C., Mason, S., McKay, F., Jenkins, L., Howarth, A., et al. (2016) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.i3426 · Cited by 149
Lewis, C., Hill, M., & Chitty, L. S. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0153147 · Cited by 85
van Schendel, R. V., Page‐Christiaens, G. C. M. L., Beulen, L., Bilardo, C. M., de Boer, M. A., Coumans, A. B. C., Faas, B. H. W., van Langen, I. M., Lichtenbelt, K. D., van Maarle, M. C., et al. (2017) · Journal of Genetic Counseling · doi:10.1007/s10897-017-0118-3 · Cited by 59
Metadata
- Authors
- Tabor, A., & Alfirevic, Z.
- Venue
- Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy
- Publisher
- S. Karger AG
- Published
- 2009-12-24
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-7
- ISSN
- 1015-3837 (ISSN-L)
- 1421-9964
- OpenAlex
- W2064609638
- Cited by
- 399
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 16.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Update on Procedure-Related Risks for Prenatal Diagnosis Techniques. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1159/000271995
- The paper
- Tabor, A., & Alfirevic, Z. (2010). Update on Procedure-Related Risks for Prenatal Diagnosis Techniques. Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy. https://doi.org/10.1159/000271995
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.