Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 11663490

Which amendment?

Abstract

The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

William Devlin. 1974. Which amendment?. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11663490/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Abortions and breast cancer: record-based case-control study.

It has been suggested that abortions leave the breast epithelium in a proliferative state with an increased susceptibility to carcinogenesis. Results from previous studies of induced or spontaneous abortions and risk of subsequent breast cancer are contradictory, probably due to methodological considerations. We investigated the relationship between abortions and subsequent breast cancer risk in a case-control study using prospectively recorded exposure information. The study population comprised women recorded in the population-based Swedish Medical Birth Register between 1973-91. Cases were defined by linkage of the birth register to the Swedish Cancer Register and controls were randomly selected from the birth register. From the subjects' antenatal care records we abstracted prospectively collected information on induced and spontaneous abortions, as well as a number of potential confounding factors. Relative risk of breast cancer was estimated by odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). A reduced risk of breast cancer was observed for women with a history of at least 1 compared to no abortions (adjusted OR = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.72-0.99). The adjusted OR decreases step-wise with number of abortions to 0.59 (95% CI = 0.34-1.03) for 3 or more compared to no abortions. The patterns are similar for induced and spontaneous abortions. In conclusion, neither a history of induced nor spontaneous abortions is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. Our data suggest a protective effect of pregnancies regardless of outcome.

Abortion, Induced↗

Poor outcome in Down syndrome fetuses with cardiac anomalies or growth retardation.

The outcome of Down syndrome fetuses presenting with sonographic abnormalities in the second or third trimester is unclear. Therefore, we studied 55 pregnancies referred because of sonographically suspected fetal structural anomalies or growth retardation due to trisomy 21. A detailed ultrasound scan was performed in all cases to delineate the structural anomalies. Congenital heart malformations (CHMs) were diagnosed pre- and postnatally in 29 out of 55 Down fetuses (53%), with complete or incomplete atrioventricular septal defects (AVSDs) and ventricular septal defects (VSDs) being the most frequent anomalies. The most frequent noncardiac findings were a short femur (45%) and a small-for-gestational age (SGA) fetus (27%). Termination of pregnancy was carried out in 25 out of 55 pregnancies (45%). Of the 30 continued pregnancies, 10 ended with intrauterine death. The remaining 20 pregnancies resulted in the delivery of a live-born infant whose prognosis was poor, with a 1-year survival of only 60%. Combining intrauterine death and death in the first year indicated that the overall survival rate was only 40%. Fatal outcome was noted in 68% (13/19) in the presence of CHM, in 83% (10/12) in SGA fetuses, in 86% (6/7) in combined CHM and SGA, but only in 17% (1/6) in the absence of CHM and SGA. This study indictes that second- and third-trimester in utero diagnosis of Down syndrome has a poor outcome when associated with CHM and/or SGA. This is important in the genetic counseling of the parents.

Abortion, Induced↗