首页> 外文期刊>Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology >Chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis in 2008.
【24h】

Chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis in 2008.

机译:绒毛膜绒毛取样和羊膜穿刺术在2008年。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Over the past decades there have been wide discrepancies between quoted risks of diagnostic procedures (chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis) yet little properly controlled and randomized data to back often dogmatic assertions. Here, we review the historical and current literature to determine realistic estimates. RECENT FINDINGS: Several papers this past year have addressed in cohort studies and meta-analyses composite risks for both chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis. The studies have had varying degrees of reliability and likely reproducibility. SUMMARY: Despite one outlier paper, which had major methodological flaws, the consensus of the modern literature is that in experienced hands there is little to no differences between the procedure risks of amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling. The latter, however, is clearly harder to learn and has a steeper learning curve.
机译:审查的目的:在过去的几十年中,所引用的诊断程序风险(绒毛膜绒毛取样和羊膜穿刺术)之间存在很大差异,但很少得到适当控制和随机化的数据来支持通常为教条式的断言。在这里,我们回顾历史和当前文献以确定现实的估计。最近的发现:去年有几篇论文在队列研究中进行了研究,并对荟萃分析绒毛膜绒毛取样和羊膜穿刺术的综合风险进行了分析。这些研究具有不同程度的可靠性和可重复性。简介:尽管有一篇异常的论文存在重大的方法学缺陷,但现代文献的共识是,在经验丰富的手中,羊膜穿刺术和绒毛膜绒毛取样的风险之间几乎没有差异。但是,后者显然更难学习并且学习曲线更陡峭。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号