Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Late amniocentesis: better late than never? A single referral centre experience

  • Maternal-Fetal Medicine
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Several congenital abnormalities present late in pregnancy necessitating invasive testing to rule out genetic/infectious causes at late gestation. Not many studies have described the indications/safety of a late gestation amniocentesis.

Methods

All records of amniocentesis performed beyond 24 weeks were reviewed and evaluated for indications, positive yield and complications.

Results

About 187 women had an amniocentesis after 24 weeks for various indications with CNS abnormalities being the commonest. The total yield of positive findings was 14.60% (22/150; excluding 2 VOUS). CNS, multiple system involvement and skeletal system anormalities yielded maximum results. About 32.05% abnormalities could have potentially been detected at the time of a routine anomaly scan. Amongst all the deliveries, 2.1%  delivered spontaneously within a week of the procedure and about 5.4% delivered spontaneously within a month of the procedure.

Conclusion

The study emphasises the need for additional accreditation (FMF, ISUOG) of sonographers to ensure the detection of anomalies at the routine 18–20 weeks scan. Inspite of a normal mid-trimester scan, central nervous system and gastrointestinal abnormalities presented more commonly after 24 weeks. The high positive yield in our study highlights the importance of testing even in late pregnancy beyond the legal age of termination. The test could clearly stratify the pregnancies with a poor outcome whilst reassuring the others. The procedure itself did not lead to a neonatal death due to prematurity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Akolekar R, Beta J, Picciarelli G et al (2015) Procedure-related risk of miscarriage following amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 45(1):16–26

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Malinger G, Lerman-Sagie T, Watemberg N et al (2002) A normal second-trimester ultrasound does not exclude intracranial structural pathology. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 20(1):51–56

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Yinon Y, Katorza E, Nassie DI et al (2013) Late diagnosis of fetal central nervous system anomalies following a normal second trimester anatomy scan. Prenat Diag. https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.4163

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. The Medical Termination of Pregnancy (Amendment) Act, 2021. The Gazette of India, No. 8 of 2021

  5. Geffen KT, Ben-Zvi O, Weitzner O et al (2017) The yield and complications of amniocentesis performed after 24 weeks of gestation. Arch Gynecol Obstet 296(1):69–77

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Daum H, David AB, Nadjari M et al (2019) The impact of late amniocentesis in the modern genomic technologies era. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 53:676–685

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. O’Donoghue K, Giorgi L, Pontello V et al (2007) Amniocentesis in the third trimester of pregnancy. Prenat Diagn 27:1000–1004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Drummond CL, Molina-Gomes D, Senat MV (2003) Fetal karyotyping after 28 weeks of gestation for late ultrasound findings in a low risk population. Prenat Diagn 23:1068–1072

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bardin R (2018) Eran Hadara,*, lylach haizler-cohen, rinat gabbay-benziv, et al cytogenetic analysis in fetuses with late onset abnormal sonographic findings. J Perinat Med 46(9):975–982

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ficara A, Syngelaki A, Hammami A, Akolekar R, Nicolaides KH (2020) Value of routine ultrasound examination at 35–37 weeks’ gestation in diagnosis of fetal abnormalities. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 55(1):75–80

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Gagnon S, Fraser W, Fouquette B et al (1992) Nature and frequency of chromosomal abnormalities in pregnancies with abnormal ultrasound findings: an analysis of 117 cases with review of the literature. Prenat Diagn 12:9–18

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Borrell A, Grande M (2017) Eva meler joan sabrià; genomic microarray in fetuses with early growth restriction: a multicenter study. Fetal Diagn Ther 42:174–180

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. O’Donoghue K, Giorgi L (2007) Valentina pontello; amniocentesis in the third trimester of pregnancy. Prenat Diagn 27:1000–1004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Michael C (2002) Gordon, komal narula, richard o’shaughnessy, et al; complications of third-trimester amniocentesis using continuous ultrasound guidance. Obstet Gynecol 99(2):255–259

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hodor JG, Poggi SH, Spong CY (2006) Risk of third-trimester amniocentesis a case-control study. Am J Perinatol 23(3):177–180

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Toutain J, Lemaire-Coustel MA, Begorre M et al (2012) Proportion of parents agreeing to delay fetal karyotyping until the third trimester of pregnancy in cases with an indication. Fetal Diagn Ther 31:115–121

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gabbay R, Yogev Y, Melamed N et al (2012) Pregnancy outcome after third trimester amniocentesis: a single center experience. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 25(6):666–668

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Picone O, Senat M-V, Rosenblatt J, Audibert F, Tachdjian G (2008) Rene frydman; fear of pregnancy loss and fetal karyotyping: a place for third-trimester amniocentesis? Fetal Diagn Ther 23:30–35

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Salomon J, Sotiriadis A, Wulff CB, Odibo A, Akolekar R (2019) Risk of miscarriage following amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling: systematic review of literature and updated meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 54(4):442–451

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors have not disclosed any funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Dr AK and Dr AS conceived the study plan. Dr A contributed to collating data and writing the manuscript. Dr Anita Kaul helped in editing the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Akshatha Sharma.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have not disclosed any competing interests.

Ethics approval

Institutional Ethical Committee, Biomedical Research Committee, Indraprastha Apollo Hospitals, New Delhi approval obtained (Ref IAH-BMR-013/05–20).

Consent to participant

Informed Consent was taken from participants for analysis of their data.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sharma, A., Kaul, A. Late amniocentesis: better late than never? A single referral centre experience. Arch Gynecol Obstet 308, 463–470 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-022-06662-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-022-06662-6

Keywords

Navigation