| pubmed-article:8442794 | rdf:type | pubmed:Citation | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0694698 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0005834 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0036043 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0522523 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C1511545 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C1513371 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:issue | 1 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:dateCreated | 1993-4-8 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:abstractText | Percutaneous umbilical blood sampling (PUBS) is increasingly utilized for cytogenetic assessment of the fetus. In the present study, outcome of 109 PUBS-derived fetal blood samples were analyzed according to mode of ascertainment: ultrasound-detected anatomic anomalies or intrauterine growth retardation (IUGR). Abnormal chromosome complements were found in 6 of 47 (12.8%) fetuses with anomalies but in only 1 of 62 (1.6%) fetuses with IUGR alone. Perinatal loss in fetuses with anatomic anomalies was 64.4%, compared with only 1.6% in fetuses with IUGR alone. Mode of patient ascertainment is an important factor that must be considered in determining procedure-related risks for PUBS. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:grant | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:grant | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:language | eng | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:journal | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:citationSubset | IM | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:status | MEDLINE | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:month | Jan | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:issn | 0735-1631 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:SibaiB MBM | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:TharapelA TAT | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:BartonJ RJR | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:MercerB MBM | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:PhillipsO POP | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:ShaverD CDC | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:ShulmanL PLP | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:MeyersC MCM | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:DacusJ VJV | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:MorettiM LML | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:issnType | Print | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:volume | 10 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:owner | NLM | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:authorsComplete | N | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:pagination | 27-9 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:dateRevised | 2007-11-15 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8442794-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8442794-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8442794-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8442794-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8442794-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8442794-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8442794-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8442794-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8442794-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8442794-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8442794-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8442794-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8442794-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8442794-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:year | 1993 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:articleTitle | Mode of ascertainment is critical in assessing safety of percutaneous umbilical blood sampling. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:affiliation | Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Tennessee, Memphis 38103-2896. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:publicationType | Journal Article | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:publicationType | Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:publicationType | Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8442794 | pubmed:publicationType | Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't | lld:pubmed |
