|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Standard of Care, nuchal translucencyFrom: ATB28@aol.comWed Feb 3 21:50:13 1999
In a message dated 2/3/1999 10:57:05 AM Pacific Standard Time, evsono@pipeline.com writes: << but it WILL be. the most important point Allan makes is that there should be INFORMED consent. in other words, if one is going to measure nuchal translucency, the patient should understand the implications. furthermore, NT screening will doubtless be combined with serum screening to enhance the sensitivity. hopefully all of this may someday be supplanted by evaluation of fetal cells in maternal circulation. cross your fingers and stay tuned.
Art
>> And WHEN it is, it should be done by qualified individuals who have demonstrated their expertise and maintain it in an ongoing fashion. I agree with Art on fetal cells- I think that FCMS will ultimately prove to be an invaluable asset in improving screening, if not *the* way to go primarily, but there is still a long way for that technology to go before it will supplant invasive prenatal diagnosis. Allan
|
|
Return to
|
Mail a New Message to the Forum: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: geffrey.klein@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Wed Dec 2 05:27:38 2009 |
The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.