Lamellar bodies as a diagnostic test of fetal lung maturity

International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics

Volumn 77, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 217-221

  Roiz Hernandez J ^a   Navarro Solis, E ^a   Carreon Valdez E ^a  

^a Hospital General de Zona IMSS   (Mexico)

Author keywords

Fetal lung maturity; Lamellar bodies; Respiratory distress syndrome

Indexed keywords

AMNION FLUID ANALYSIS; ARTICLE; CENTRIFUGATION; CESAREAN SECTION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEVICE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; FEMALE; FETUS LUNG MATURATION; FOLLOW UP; GESTATIONAL AGE; HUMAN; LABOR; LAMELLAR BODY; MEXICO; NEONATOLOGY; PREGNANCY; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RESPIRATORY DISTRESS SYNDROME; STATISTICAL MODEL; THROMBOCYTE; VAGINA SMEAR;

EID: 0036283789     PISSN: 00207292     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0020-7292(02)00036-X     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Diagnosis of the respiratory distress syndrome by amniocentesis
2. Pulmonary lamellar bodies in human amniotic fluid: Their relationship to fetal age and lecitin/sphingomyelin ratio
3. Measuring the number of lamellar body particles in amniotic fluid
4. Lamellar body number density and the prediction of respiratory distress
5. Utility of a rapid lamellar body count in the assessment of fetal maturity
6. Assessment of fetal maturity. Practice Parameter
7. Lamellar body concentrations and the prediction of fetal pulmonary maturity
8. Lamellar body counts for rapid fetal lung maturity testing
9. Neonatal morbidity according to gestational age and birth weigth from five tertiary care centers in the United States, 1983 through 1986
10. Evaluation of lamellar body number density as the initial assessment in a fetal lung maturity test cascade
11. Amniotic fluid lamellar body count: A rapid and reliable fetal lung maturity test
12. Lecithin/sphingomyelin ratios in amniotic fluid in normal and abnormal pregnancy
13. Current status of amniotic test of fetal maturity
14. What affects fetal pulmonary maturation during diabetic pregnancies?
15. Evaluating bias and variability in diagnostic test reports