目前产前诊断的争议2:传统的死后检查仍然是胎儿丢失解剖检查的金标准。

IF 2.7 2区 医学 Q2 GENETICS & HEREDITY
Prenatal Diagnosis Pub Date : 2025-02-06 DOI:10.1002/pd.6754
J Ciaran Hutchinson, Lorraine Potocki, Ignatia B Van den Veyver
{"title":"目前产前诊断的争议2:传统的死后检查仍然是胎儿丢失解剖检查的金标准。","authors":"J Ciaran Hutchinson, Lorraine Potocki, Ignatia B Van den Veyver","doi":"10.1002/pd.6754","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A comprehensive postmortem examination is an essential component of a work-up after stillbirth. Its findings can support accurate counseling of parents about causes and risk of recurrence. It also supports providers' decisions about most appropriate testing and management plans for future pregnancy to prevent recurrence. Informing parents about fetal autopsy and obtaining their consent is challenging, and conducting a fetal autopsy requires expertise that is, not universally available. Newer non-invasive or minimally invasive methods such as postmortem MRI and targeted biopsies can replace or supplement autopsies, but one must recognize that expertise in these methods is likewise not broadly available. This prompts the question whether a conventional postmortem examination should remain the gold standard for the anatomical examination of fetal loss. This report summarizes the \"for\" and \"against\" arguments made by two experts during a debate at the 28th International Conference on Prenatal Diagnosis and Therapy. Arguments favoring comprehensive fetal autopsy include the need to obtain the most complete and accurate information about the cause of the stillbirth. Arguments in favor of less invasive post-mortem examinations using other technologies include sufficiency in many instances and a more equitable and cost-effective approach to postmortem examination. While both debaters weighed the balance of these conflicting arguments differently, they agreed that more research in this area is needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":20387,"journal":{"name":"Prenatal Diagnosis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Current Controversies in Prenatal Diagnosis 2: Conventional Postmortem Examination Remains the Gold Standard for the Anatomical Examination of Fetal Loss.\",\"authors\":\"J Ciaran Hutchinson, Lorraine Potocki, Ignatia B Van den Veyver\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/pd.6754\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>A comprehensive postmortem examination is an essential component of a work-up after stillbirth. Its findings can support accurate counseling of parents about causes and risk of recurrence. It also supports providers' decisions about most appropriate testing and management plans for future pregnancy to prevent recurrence. Informing parents about fetal autopsy and obtaining their consent is challenging, and conducting a fetal autopsy requires expertise that is, not universally available. Newer non-invasive or minimally invasive methods such as postmortem MRI and targeted biopsies can replace or supplement autopsies, but one must recognize that expertise in these methods is likewise not broadly available. This prompts the question whether a conventional postmortem examination should remain the gold standard for the anatomical examination of fetal loss. This report summarizes the \\\"for\\\" and \\\"against\\\" arguments made by two experts during a debate at the 28th International Conference on Prenatal Diagnosis and Therapy. Arguments favoring comprehensive fetal autopsy include the need to obtain the most complete and accurate information about the cause of the stillbirth. Arguments in favor of less invasive post-mortem examinations using other technologies include sufficiency in many instances and a more equitable and cost-effective approach to postmortem examination. While both debaters weighed the balance of these conflicting arguments differently, they agreed that more research in this area is needed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20387,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Prenatal Diagnosis\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Prenatal Diagnosis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.6754\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GENETICS & HEREDITY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Prenatal Diagnosis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.6754","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

全面的死后检查是死产后检查的重要组成部分。它的研究结果可以为家长提供关于病因和复发风险的准确咨询。它还支持提供者对未来怀孕最适当的检测和管理计划的决定,以防止复发。告知父母关于胎儿解剖并获得他们的同意是具有挑战性的,进行胎儿解剖需要的专业知识并不是普遍可用的。较新的非侵入性或微创性方法,如死后MRI和靶向活检,可以取代或补充尸检,但必须认识到,这些方法的专业知识同样也不是广泛可用的。这就提出了一个问题,传统的死后检查是否仍然是胎儿丢失解剖检查的金标准。本报告总结了第28届国际产前诊断和治疗会议上两位专家在辩论中提出的“赞成”和“反对”的论点。赞成全面胎儿尸检的论点包括需要获得关于死产原因的最完整和准确的信息。支持使用其他技术进行侵入性较小的死后检查的论点包括在许多情况下的充分性以及更公平和更具成本效益的死后检查方法。虽然两位辩论者对这些相互矛盾的观点的权衡不同,但他们一致认为,需要在这一领域进行更多的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Current Controversies in Prenatal Diagnosis 2: Conventional Postmortem Examination Remains the Gold Standard for the Anatomical Examination of Fetal Loss.

A comprehensive postmortem examination is an essential component of a work-up after stillbirth. Its findings can support accurate counseling of parents about causes and risk of recurrence. It also supports providers' decisions about most appropriate testing and management plans for future pregnancy to prevent recurrence. Informing parents about fetal autopsy and obtaining their consent is challenging, and conducting a fetal autopsy requires expertise that is, not universally available. Newer non-invasive or minimally invasive methods such as postmortem MRI and targeted biopsies can replace or supplement autopsies, but one must recognize that expertise in these methods is likewise not broadly available. This prompts the question whether a conventional postmortem examination should remain the gold standard for the anatomical examination of fetal loss. This report summarizes the "for" and "against" arguments made by two experts during a debate at the 28th International Conference on Prenatal Diagnosis and Therapy. Arguments favoring comprehensive fetal autopsy include the need to obtain the most complete and accurate information about the cause of the stillbirth. Arguments in favor of less invasive post-mortem examinations using other technologies include sufficiency in many instances and a more equitable and cost-effective approach to postmortem examination. While both debaters weighed the balance of these conflicting arguments differently, they agreed that more research in this area is needed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Prenatal Diagnosis
Prenatal Diagnosis 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
13.30%
发文量
204
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Prenatal Diagnosis welcomes submissions in all aspects of prenatal diagnosis with a particular focus on areas in which molecular biology and genetics interface with prenatal care and therapy, encompassing: all aspects of fetal imaging, including sonography and magnetic resonance imaging; prenatal cytogenetics, including molecular studies and array CGH; prenatal screening studies; fetal cells and cell-free nucleic acids in maternal blood and other fluids; preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD); prenatal diagnosis of single gene disorders, including metabolic disorders; fetal therapy; fetal and placental development and pathology; development and evaluation of laboratory services for prenatal diagnosis; psychosocial, legal, ethical and economic aspects of prenatal diagnosis; prenatal genetic counseling
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信