The Embryo pp 91-100 | Cite as

Transabdominal Chorion Villus Biopsy Versus Amniocentesis for Diagnosis of Aneuploidy: Safety Is Not Enough

  • R. J. Lilford
  • H. Irving
  • J. K. Gupta
  • P. O’Donovan
  • G. Linton


Chorion villus sampling (CVS) is well established as the optimal diagnostic method for diagnosis of single gene defects. However, the majority of invasive diagnostic procedures are not performed for these conditions of high genetic risk but are carried out for diagnosis of aneuploidy. In this paper we attempt to answer the question: will chorion villus biopsy replace amniocentesis as the most widely used test for the prenatal diagnosis of Down’s syndrome?


Prenatal Diagnosis Miscarriage Rate Staff Time Amniotic Fluid Sample High Genetic Risk 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Heslop AF, Fairweather DVI, Blackwill RJ, Howard S (1984); The effect of amniocentesis and drainage of amniotic fluid on lung development in maca fascicularis during fetal and postnatal life. Br J Obstet Gynaec 91: 835–842CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Keeney RL, Raiffa H (1976) Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value trade-offs, John Wiley and Sons, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Knott PD, Ward RHT, Lucas Mk (1986) Effect of chorionic villus sampling and early pregnancy counselling on uptake of prenatal diagnosis. Br Med J 293: 479–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Lilford RJ, Maxwell D (1984) The development of a transcutaneous technique for chorion biopsy. Prenatal Diagnosis Group Newsletter: October, Queen Charlotte’s Hospital, LondonGoogle Scholar
  5. Lilford RJ, Irving HC, Linton G, Moran M (1987) Transabdominal chorion villus biopsy: 100 consecutive cases. Lancet i: 1415–1417Google Scholar
  6. Llewellyn-Thomas H, Sutherland HJ, Tibshirani R, Ciampi A, Till JE, Boyd NF (1982) The measurement of patients’ values in medicine. Med Decis Making 2 (4): 449–462PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Maxwell D, Lilford RJ, Czepulkowski BH, Heaton DE, Coleman DV (1986) Transabdominal chorionic villus sampling. Lancet i: 123–612Google Scholar
  8. McMay MB, Whitfield CR (1984) Amniocentesis. Br J Hosp Med 31: 406–416Google Scholar
  9. Medical Research Council Amniocentesis Working Party (1978) An assessment of the hazards of amniocentesis. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 85: Suppl 2Google Scholar
  10. Pauker SP, Pauker SG (1977) Prenatal diagnosis: a directive approach to genetic counselling using decision analysis. Yale J Biol Med 50: 275–289PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Simpson NE, Dallaire L, Miller JR, et al. (1976) Prenatal diagnosis of genetic disease in Canada report of a collaborative study. Can Med Assoc J 115: 739–748PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Tabor A, Madsen M, Obel EB, Philip J, Bang J, Nordgaard-Pedersen B (1986) Randomised controlled trial of genetic amniocentesis in 4606 low-risk women. Lancet i: 1287–1293Google Scholar
  13. The NICHD National Registry for Amniocentesis Study Group (1976). Midtrimester amniocentesis for prenatal diagnosis. Safety and accuracy. JAMA 236: 1471–1476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Thornton J, Lilford R, Howel D (1986). The safety of amniocentesis. Lancet ii: 226Google Scholar
  15. Weinstein MC, Fineberg HV, (eds) (1980) Clinical decision analysis. WB Saunders, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  16. Wilson Rd, Kendrick W, Wittman BK, McGillvray BC (1984) Risk of spontaneous abortion in ultrasonically normal pregnancies. Lancet ii: 290Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. J. Lilford
  • H. Irving
  • J. K. Gupta
  • P. O’Donovan
  • G. Linton

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations