Pregnancy loss rates after midtrimester amniocentesis

Keith A. Eddleman, Fergal D. Malone, Lisa Sullivan, Kim Dukes, Richard L. Berkowitz, Yara Kharbutli, T. Flint Porter, David A. Luthy, Christine H. Comstock, George R. Saade, Susan Klugman, Lorraine Dugoff, Sabrina D. Craigo, Ilan E. Timor-Tritsch, Stephen R. Carr, Honor M. Wolfe, Mary E. D'Alton

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

222 Scopus citations


OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to quantify the contemporary procedure-related loss rate after midtrimester amniocentesis using a database generated from patients who were recruited to the First And Second Trimester Evaluation of Risk for Aneuploidy trial. METHODS: A total of 35,003 unselected patients from the general population with viable singleton pregnancies were enrolled in the First And Second Trimester Evaluation of Risk for Aneuploidy trial between 10 3/7 and 13 6/7 weeks gestation and followed up prospectively for complete pregnancy outcome information. Patients who either did (study group, n=3,096) or did not (control group, n=31,907) undergo midtrimester amniocentesis were identified from the database. The rate of fetal loss less than 24 weeks of gestation was compared between the two groups, and multiple logistic regression analysis was used to adjust for potential confounders. RESULTS: The spontaneous fetal loss rate less than 24 weeks of gestation in the study group was 1.0% and was not statistically different from the background 0.94% rate seen in the control group (P=.74, 95% confidence interval -0.26%, 0.49%). The procedure-related loss rate after amniocentesis was 0.06% (1.0% minus the background rate of 0.94%). Women undergoing amniocentesis were 1.1 times more likely to have a spontaneous loss (95% confidence interval 0.7-1.5). CONCLUSION: The procedure-related fetal loss rate after midtrimester amniocentesis performed on patients in a contemporary prospective clinical trial was 0.06%. There was no significant difference in loss rates between those undergoing amniocentesis and those not undergoing amniocentesis.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1067-1072
Number of pages6
JournalObstetrics and Gynecology
Issue number5
StatePublished - Nov 2006


Dive into the research topics of 'Pregnancy loss rates after midtrimester amniocentesis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this