Pain associated with chorionic villus sampling: transabdominal vs transcervical approach

American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 201, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 400.e1-400.e3

  Wax, Joseph R ^a   Davies, Norman P ^b   Watson, William J ^b   Cartin, Angelina ^a   Pinette, Michael G ^a   Chard, Renée ^a   Carpenter, Molly ^a  

^a MAINE MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b Mayo Clinic College of Medicine   (United States)

Author keywords

chorionic villus sampling; pain; prenatal diagnosis

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CHORION VILLUS SAMPLING; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; FEMALE; GESTATIONAL AGE; HUMAN; NOCICEPTION; PAIN; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PREGNANCY; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE;

EID: 70349332463     PISSN: 00029378     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2009.06.064     Document Type: Article

References (7)

1. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG practice bulletin no. 77: screening for fetal chromosomal abnormalities. Obstet Gynecol 109 (2007) 217-227
2. de Crespigny L., Robinson H.P., and Ngu A. Pain with amniocentesis and transabdominal CVS. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 30 (1990) 308-309
3. Wax J.R., Carpenter M., Chard R., Cartin A., and Pinette M.G. Pain associated with transabdominal chorionic villus sampling: anticipated versus actual. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 19 (2006) 421-423
4. Vandenbossche F., Horovitz J., Guyon F., Verret C., and Saura R. Pain experience during chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis: a preliminary study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 136 (2008) 189-193
5. Csaba A., Bush M.C., and Saphier C. How painful are amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling?. Prenat Diagn 26 (2006) 35-38
6. Ferber A., Oneije C.I., Zelop C.M., O'Reilly-Green C., and Divon M.Y. Maternal pain and anxiety in genetic amniocentesis: expectations versus reality. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 19 (2002) 13-17
7. Harris A., Monga M., Wicklund C.A., et al. Clinical correlates of pain with amniocentesis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 191 (2004) 542-545