-VISIT OUR OTHER FORUMS- OB-GYN-L Ultrasound Ultrasound History Fibroid Forum Physicians-in-Training Tech Talk OBSTET-L (portuguese) OBGIN-L (spanish) Nursing

Re: nuchal translucency From: art fougner, md (evsono@pipeline.com) Tue Aug 4 09:19:12 1998 Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ] Next message: Terry J. DuBose: "Re: U/S contrast agent use for tubal pat" Previous message: James S Smeltzer MD: "Re: U/S contrast agent use for tubal pat" In reply to: James S Smeltzer MD: "Re: nuchal translucency" Next in thread: Jim Smeltzer: "Re: nuchal translucency" Reply: Jim Smeltzer: "Re: nuchal translucency" Jim FISH will NOT put labs out of business as only useful in these situations to dx trisomies. FISH of amniocytes will not find the less common abn karyotypes, the mosaics, the translocations, etc. there was one case report from UCONN ( Benn et al.) of an erroneous FISH diagnosis. my feeling is that the role of FISH will be as a first stage test - if TRISOMY then clearly abnormal. If the FISH is equivocal or normal, then follow through with standard culture and karyotype. well, to quote dennis miller, "that's my opinion - i could be wrong." Art At Tue, 4 Aug 1998, James S Smeltzer MD wrote: > >Hi Tania, > >We are both right. The 30% you are talking about is 30% of the total >incidence of Down's Syndrome that is detected by testing all with Maternal >Age over 35. > >The amniotic fluid cell culture, Chromosome count and Karyotype test itself >will detect essentially all (with a small allowances for mosaic >translocations and lab error) babies with Down's syndrome whose cells are >tested. The newer, much faster and much cheaper fluorescent in situ >hybridzation test will detect about 99Plus percent. This is not approved >by the American Society of Human Genetics because it will put many of them >out of business. > >I hope this helps. > >Jim Smeltzer (gaperina@mindspring.com) > >At 07:17 PM 8/3/1998 -0500, you wrote: >>In a message dated 03/08/98 12:11:47 GMT, gaperina@mindspring.com writes: >><< To: ultrasound@talk.obgyn.net (Multiple recipients of list) >> >> Hi OnebornJoy, >> >> Amnio detection rates are still the Gold standard ~100%. I do not think it >> is the equipment - as I have seen it equally well with high and low end >> with TVS. It is the sonographers and the sensitization. >> >> >> >>Are you saying that amnio detection rates for downs syndrome are 100% >>accurate.? >>I thought they only detected about 30% and that blood tests only 60% >>Blessings >>Tania >> -- art fougner, md SonoScan/Genetic Sciences forest hills, ny evsono@pipeline.com Next message: Terry J. DuBose: "Re: U/S contrast agent use for tubal pat" Previous message: James S Smeltzer MD: "Re: U/S contrast agent use for tubal pat" In reply to: James S Smeltzer MD: "Re: nuchal translucency" Next in thread: Jim Smeltzer: "Re: nuchal translucency" Reply: Jim Smeltzer: "Re: nuchal translucency"

recommended search...
OBGYN.net forums endometriosis zone Web

Return to

Mail a New Message to the Forum: ultrasound@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: terry.dubose@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Mon Nov 2 05:39:05 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.