Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

M L Gimovsky

Publications and source records attributed to M L Gimovsky.

51 records · Page 3Linked to original sources
PubMedDate not supplied

Amniotic fluid surfactant-albumin ratio as a screening test for fetal lung maturity. Two years of clinical experience.

An automated amniotic fluid surfactant-albumin ratio (SAR) test was performed as a screening test for pregnancies requiring fetal pulmonary maturity testing. Of the 178 neonates delivered within 3 days of the testing, respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) developed in 21 (11.8%) and transient tachypnea of the newborn infant (TTN) in 11 (6.1%). A positive test was defined as one which predicted RDS or TTN. Sensitivity was interpreted as the proportion of neonates with RDS or TTN detected by SAR less than 70 mg/gm. Sensitivity was 90.7% with a specificity of 76.1%. The positive predictive value was 45.3%; the negative predictive value 97.4%. The interassay coefficient of variability was 3.5%. The SAR test has proven to be a rapid, precise laboratory tool. Our combined testing protocol uses the SAR as an initial screening test with the lecithin/sphingomyelin ratio used as backup if the SAR did not predict maturity (SAR < 70 mg/gm). This protocol has markedly lowered the use of lecithin/sphingomyelin ratios while maintaining necessary clinical accuracy.

Albumins↗
PubMedDate not supplied

The importance of genetic counseling before amniocentesis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the adequacy of genetic risk assessment among primary care providers and to evaluate the efficacy of genetic counseling before "routine" genetic amniocentesis. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study was undertaken. Charts of 275 consecutive patients referred for genetic counseling and amniocentesis on the basis of advanced maternal age (AMA) were compared with charts of 103 consecutive patients referred for an abnormal maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein (MSAFP) finding. Pedigree information obtained during counseling of these patients was compared with the family histories charted by the referring physician. RESULTS: In 35.6% of pedigrees evaluated, a significant genetic risk was discovered during genetic consultation that had not been noted by the referring physician. Furthermore, 9.8% of AMA patients and 10.7% of patients with abnormal MSAFP results underwent additional genetic testing or screening on the basis of genetic counseling. Additional genetic testing of 0.8% of amniotic fluid specimens was done on the basis of the genetic risk assessment elicited during counseling. Although a significant difference in increased genetic risk was observed between the AMA and abnormal MSAFP groups (AMA 30.8% positive, MSAFP 48.5% positive; relative risk 0.81, confidence limit 0.70 to 0.93), no significant difference was observed between the two groups with regard to patient interventions (relative risk 0.97, confidence limit 0.79 to 1.21) or amniotic fluid testing (p = 0.57, not significant). CONCLUSIONS: The data support the importance of genetic counseling before amniocentesis. Furthermore, the findings support the relevancy and usefulness of genetic counseling in more accurately ascertaining genetic risk and in maximizing the benefits of genetic evaluation of patients seemingly at low risk for other genetic diseases.

Adult↗