Second-trimester genetic sonogram for detection of fetal chromosomal abnormalities in a community-based antenatal testing unit

The likelihood of detecting abnormal karyotypes in fetuses with a single major anomaly or "soft" marker on ultrasonographic scanning

OBJECTIVE

Fetuses with abnormal karyotypes often exhibit distinctive ultrasonographic markers, including major anomalies and "soft" markers, indicating potential chromosomal issues. A crucial consideration arises when a single fetal anomaly is detected, raising the question of whether karyotyping is warranted, given the associated procedural risks. Our objective was to establish correlations between single fetal anomalies identified through ultrasound and chromosomal abnormalities.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study analyzed the karyotype of 1493 fetuses and detected a single ultrasonographic anomaly over a 16-year period. Karyotyping was performed using the standard karyotype technique. Moreover, data regarding the type of anomaly detected ultrasonographically, karyotype results, and outcomes following interventions were collected. Among other methods, the use of positive likelihood ratios (LR+) was used to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound compared to karyotyping.

RESULTS

In total, an aberrant karyotype was identified in 99 fetuses (6.6%). This was most commonly observed in cases involving a "soft" marker, occurring in 27 out of 218 fetuses (12.4%). The most frequently detected aberrant karyotype resulted from aneuploidies (80.6% of cases), notably trisomy 21 (50.5%). "Soft" markers predicted chromosomal issues (LR+ = 1.9; OR = 2.4), and isolated polyhydramnios (LR+ = 1.54; OR = 1.6) showed significance in predicting fetal chromosomal aberrations.

CONCLUSION

When assessing the necessity for karyotyping in fetuses with single major anomalies or "soft" markers, it is crucial to consider individual risks for chromosomopathies, including the LR+ of the detected marker. In cases where fetuses exhibit isolated anomalies with a normal karyotype, additional diagnostic measures, such as molecular cytogenetic and molecular genetics techniques, may become necessary.

How genomics is changing the practice of prenatal testing

New genomic laboratory technology namely microarrays and high throughput sequencing (HTS) as well as a steady progress in sonographic image capture and processing have changed the practice of prenatal diagnosis during the last decade fundamentally. Pregnancies at high risk for common trisomies are reliably identified by non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) and expert sonography has greatly improved the assessment of the fetal phenotype. Preconceptional comprehensive carrier screening using HTS is available for all parents, if they should wish to do so. A definite fetal diagnosis, however, will still require invasive testing for most conditions. Chromosomal microarrays (CMA) have greatly enhanced the resolution in the detection of chromosome anomalies and other causal copy number variations (CNV). Gene panel or whole exome sequencing (WES) is becoming the routine follow up of many anomalies detected by ultrasound after CNVs have been excluded. The benefits and limitations of the various screening as well as diagnostic options are perceived as complex by many who find it challenging to cope with the need for immediate choices. The communication of facts to ensure an informed decision making is obviously a growing challenge with the advent of the new genomic testing options. This contribution provides an overview of the current practice and policies in Switzerland.

Accuracy of the mid-trimester ultrasound scan in the detection of fetal congenital anomalies in a reference center in Northeastern Brazil

OBJECTIVE

To assess the performance of a basic mid-trimester fetal ultrasound scan protocol for the diagnosis of congenital anomalies by calculating its accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity.

METHODS

This longitudinal cohort study involved singleton pregnant women recruited at the mid-trimester fetal ultrasound scan through the postnatal evaluation of congenital anomalies. Pregnant women who underwent a routine mid-trimester ultrasound scan for fetal abnormalities at 20-24 weeks of gestation were enrolled in this study. After childbirth, we searched their medical records on gestational outcomes and neonatal examination records, as well as complementary medical examinations, to assess the ultrasound performance in diagnosing congenital malformations.

RESULTS

We included 967 pregnant women in the study population, and prenatal ultrasound scans detected congenital abnormalities in 67 fetuses (6.9%). Among newborns, 54 (5.6%) were postnatally diagnosed with malformations. The overall sensitivity and specificity of the mid-trimester ultrasound scan for congenital malformation detection were 61.1% and 96.3%, respectively, with an accuracy of 94.3% (p < .05).

CONCLUSION

The mid-trimester ultrasound scan had good accuracy in the detection of congenital malformations, although the overall sensitivity does not support it as the only screening test for anomalies throughout pregnancy.

Use of noninvasive prenatal screening with cell-free DNA in late pregnancy with sonographic soft markers

OBJECTIVE

To report the experience on the clinical use of noninvasive cell-free (cf) DNA testing at late pregnancy.

STUDY DESIGN

A cohort of 1539 women with singleton gestations of ≥23 weeks receiving cfDNA testing in a 3-year period were included for this study. Maternal characteristics and data on cfDNA testing, confirming diagnostic testing and pregnancy outcome were reviewed.

RESULTS

During the study period, 1539 patients had cfDNA testing although they had a normal first-trimester screening. Of these, 7 cases had a positive result, including 5 for chromosome 21, one for chromosome 18, and one for chromosome 13. The most common indication was soft markers on ultrasound, followed by polyhydramnios. Cytogenetic testing was done for the 5 trisomy 21 positive cases, and confirmed the cfDNA results. Confirmative testing was declined in the two cases with positive cfDNA for trisomy 18/13, and postnatal placental investigation showed confined placental mosaicism with normal karyotype in the cord blood of newborns. There were no confirmed false negatives reported. The cfDNA screening achieved a positive predictive value of 71.4 % and a negative predictive value of 100 % in late pregnancy for common trisomies.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no gestational age upper limit for cfDNA use in the clinical practice. Most of the time, cfDNA was used in late gestation for reassurance in patients who is at low risk for aneuploidies but had second-trimester soft markers on ultrasound.

Meta-analysis of validity of echogenic intracardiac foci for calculating the risk of Down syndrome in the second trimester of pregnancy

Echogenic intracardiac foci are a second trimester marker associated with aneuploidy in high-risk populations. The objective of this study is to assess the validity of echogenic intracardiac foci for Down syndrome detection in the second trimester ultrasound scan. A systematic search in major bibliographic databases was carried out (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL). Twenty-five studies about echogenic intracardiac foci were selected for statistical synthesis in this systematic review. Those 25 considered to be relevant were then subjected to critical reading, following the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme criteria, by at least three independent observers. Then, the published articles were subjected to a meta-analysis. A global sensitivity of 21.8% and a 4.1% false positive rate were obtained. The positive likelihood ratio was 5.08 (95% confidence interval, 4.04-6.41). The subgroups analysis did not reveal statistically significant differences. In conclusion, echogenic intracardiac foci as an isolated marker could be a tool to identify-rather than exclude-the high-risk group of Down syndrome, although it should be noted that it shows low sensitivity.

First trimester ultrasound tests alone or in combination with first trimester serum tests for Down's syndrome screening

BACKGROUND

Down's syndrome occurs when a person has three, rather than two copies of chromosome 21; or the specific area of chromosome 21 implicated in causing Down's syndrome. It is the commonest congenital cause of mental disability and also leads to numerous metabolic and structural problems. It can be life-threatening, or lead to considerable ill health, although some individuals have only mild problems and can lead relatively normal lives. Having a baby with Down's syndrome is likely to have a significant impact on family life.Non-invasive screening based on biochemical analysis of maternal serum or urine, or fetal ultrasound measurements, allows estimates of the risk of a pregnancy being affected and provides information to guide decisions about definitive testing.Before agreeing to screening tests, parents need to be fully informed about the risks, benefits and possible consequences of such a test. This includes subsequent choices for further tests they may face, and the implications of both false positive and false negative screening tests (i.e. invasive diagnostic testing, and the possibility that a miscarried fetus may be chromosomally normal). The decisions that may be faced by expectant parents inevitably engender a high level of anxiety at all stages of the screening process, and the outcomes of screening can be associated with considerable physical and psychological morbidity. No screening test can predict the severity of problems a person with Down's syndrome will have.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate and compare the accuracy of first trimester ultrasound markers alone, and in combination with first trimester serum tests for the detection of Down's syndrome.

SEARCH METHODS

We carried out extensive literature searches including MEDLINE (1980 to 25 August 2011), Embase (1980 to 25 August 2011), BIOSIS via EDINA (1985 to 25 August 2011), CINAHL via OVID (1982 to 25 August 2011), and The Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (the Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 7). We checked reference lists and published review articles for additional potentially relevant studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies evaluating tests of first trimester ultrasound screening, alone or in combination with first trimester serum tests (up to 14 weeks' gestation) for Down's syndrome, compared with a reference standard, either chromosomal verification or macroscopic postnatal inspection.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted as test positive/test negative results for Down's and non-Down's pregnancies allowing estimation of detection rates (sensitivity) and false positive rates (1-specificity). We performed quality assessment according to QUADAS criteria. We used hierarchical summary ROC meta-analytical methods to analyse test performance and compare test accuracy. Analysis of studies allowing direct comparison between tests was undertaken. We investigated the impact of maternal age on test performance in subgroup analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 126 studies (152 publications) involving 1,604,040 fetuses (including 8454 Down's syndrome cases). Studies were generally good quality, although differential verification was common with invasive testing of only high-risk pregnancies. Sixty test combinations were evaluated formed from combinations of 11 different ultrasound markers (nuchal translucency (NT), nasal bone, ductus venosus Doppler, maxillary bone length, fetal heart rate, aberrant right subclavian artery, frontomaxillary facial angle, presence of mitral gap, tricuspid regurgitation, tricuspid blood flow and iliac angle 90 degrees); 12 serum tests (inhibin A, alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), free beta human chorionic gonadotrophin (ßhCG), total hCG, pregnancy-associated plasma protein A (PAPP-A), unconjugated oestriol (uE3), disintegrin and metalloprotease 12 (ADAM 12), placental growth factor (PlGF), placental growth hormone (PGH), invasive trophoblast antigen (ITA) (synonymous with hyperglycosylated hCG), growth hormone binding protein (GHBP) and placental protein 13 (PP13)); and maternal age. The most frequently evaluated serum markers in combination with ultrasound markers were PAPP-A and free ßhCG.Comparisons of the 10 most frequently evaluated test strategies showed that a combined NT, PAPP-A, free ßhCG and maternal age test strategy significantly outperformed ultrasound markers alone (with or without maternal age) except nasal bone, detecting about nine out of every 10 Down's syndrome pregnancies at a 5% false positive rate (FPR). In both direct and indirect comparisons, the combined NT, PAPP-A, free ßhCG and maternal age test strategy showed superior diagnostic accuracy to an NT and maternal age test strategy (P < 0.0001). Based on the indirect comparison of all available studies for the two tests, the sensitivity (95% confidence interval) estimated at a 5% FPR for the combined NT, PAPP-A, free ßhCG and maternal age test strategy (69 studies; 1,173,853 fetuses including 6010 with Down's syndrome) was 87% (86 to 89) and for the NT and maternal age test strategy (50 studies; 530,874 fetuses including 2701 Down's syndrome pregnancies) was 71% (66 to 75). Combinations of NT with other ultrasound markers, PAPP-A and free ßhCG were evaluated in one or two studies and showed sensitivities of more than 90% and specificities of more than 95%.High-risk populations (defined before screening was done, mainly due to advanced maternal age of 35 years or more, or previous pregnancies affected with Down's syndrome) showed lower detection rates compared to routine screening populations at a 5% FPR. Women who miscarried in the over 35 group were more likely to have been offered an invasive test to verify a negative screening results, whereas those under 35 were usually not offered invasive testing for a negative screening result. Pregnancy loss in women under 35 therefore leads to under-ascertainment of screening results, potentially missing a proportion of affected pregnancies and affecting test sensitivity. Conversely, for the NT, PAPP-A, free ßhCG and maternal age test strategy, detection rates and false positive rates increased with maternal age in the five studies that provided data separately for the subset of women aged 35 years or more.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Test strategies that combine ultrasound markers with serum markers, especially PAPP-A and free ßhCG, and maternal age were significantly better than those involving only ultrasound markers (with or without maternal age) except nasal bone. They detect about nine out of 10 Down's affected pregnancies for a fixed 5% FPR. Although the absence of nasal bone appeared to have a high diagnostic accuracy, only five out of 10 affected Down's pregnancies were detected at a 1% FPR.

First and second trimester serum tests with and without first trimester ultrasound tests for Down's syndrome screening

BACKGROUND

Down's syndrome occurs when a person has three copies of chromosome 21 (or the specific area of chromosome 21 implicated in causing Down's syndrome) rather than two. It is the commonest congenital cause of mental disability. Non-invasive screening based on biochemical analysis of maternal serum or urine, or fetal ultrasound measurements, allows estimates of the risk of a pregnancy being affected and provides information to guide decisions about definitive testing.  Before agreeing to screening tests, parents need to be fully informed about the risks, benefits and possible consequences of such a test. This includes subsequent choices for further tests they may face, and the implications of both false positive (i.e. invasive diagnostic testing, and the possibility that a miscarried fetus may be chromosomally normal) and false negative screening tests (i.e. a fetus with Down's syndrome will be missed). The decisions that may be faced by expectant parents inevitably engender a high level of anxiety at all stages of the screening process, and the outcomes of screening can be associated with considerable physical and psychological morbidity. No screening test can predict the severity of problems a person with Down's syndrome will have.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate and compare the accuracy of first and second trimester serum markers with and without first trimester ultrasound markers for the detection of Down's syndrome in the antenatal period, as combinations of markers.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted a sensitive and comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE (1980 to 25 August 2011), Embase (1980 to 25 August 2011), BIOSIS via EDINA (1985 to 25 August 2011), CINAHL via OVID (1982 to 25 August 2011), the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (the Cochrane Library 25 August 2011), MEDION (25 August 2011), the Database of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in Laboratory Medicine (25 August 2011), the National Research Register (Archived 2007), and Health Services Research Projects in Progress database (25 August 2011). We did not apply a diagnostic test search filter. We did forward citation searching in ISI citation indices, Google Scholar and PubMed 'related articles'. We also searched reference lists of retrieved articles SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies evaluating tests of combining first and second trimester maternal serum markers in women up to 24 weeks of gestation for Down's syndrome, with or without first trimester ultrasound markers, compared with a reference standard, either chromosomal verification or macroscopic postnatal inspection.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted as test positive/test negative results for Down's and non-Down's pregnancies allowing estimation of detection rates (sensitivity) and false positive rates (1-specificity). We performed quality assessment according to QUADAS criteria. We used hierarchical summary ROC meta-analytical methods to analyse test performance and compare test accuracy. Analysis of studies allowing direct comparison between tests was undertaken. We investigated the impact of maternal age on test performance in subgroup analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-two studies (reported in 25 publications) involving 228,615 pregnancies (including 1067 with Down's syndrome) were included. Studies were generally high quality, although differential verification was common with invasive testing of only high risk pregnancies. Ten studies made direct comparisons between tests. Thirty-two different test combinations were evaluated formed from combinations of eight different tests and maternal age; first trimester nuchal translucency (NT) and the serum markers AFP, uE3, total hCG, free βhCG, Inhibin A, PAPP-A and ADAM 12. We looked at tests combining first and second trimester markers with or without ultrasound as complete tests, and we also examined stepwise and contingent strategies.Meta-analysis of the six most frequently evaluated test combinations showed that a test strategy involving maternal age and a combination of first trimester NT and PAPP-A, and second trimester total hCG, uE3, AFP and Inhibin A significantly outperformed other test combinations that involved only one serum marker or NT in the first trimester, detecting about nine out of every 10 Down's syndrome pregnancies at a 5% false positive rate. However, the evidence was limited in terms of the number of studies evaluating this strategy, and we therefore cannot recommend one single screening strategy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Tests involving first trimester ultrasound with first and second trimester serum markers in combination with maternal age are significantly better than those without ultrasound, or those evaluating first trimester ultrasound in combination with second trimester serum markers, without first trimester serum markers. We cannot make recommendations about a specific strategy on the basis of the small number of studies available.

Prevalence of defined ultrasound findings of unknown significance at the second trimester fetal anomaly scan and their association with adverse pregnancy outcomes: the Welsh study of mothers and babies population-based cohort

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this article was to estimate the population prevalence of seven defined ultrasound findings of uncertain significance ('markers') in the second trimester and the associated risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes.

METHOD

A prospective record-linked cohort study of 30 078 pregnant women who had second trimester anomaly scans between July 2008 and March 2011 in Wales was conducted.

RESULTS

The prevalence of markers ranged from 43.7 per 1000 singleton pregnancies for cardiac echogenic foci [95% confidence interval (CI): 38.8, 51.1] to 0.6 for mild-to-moderate ventriculomegaly (95% CI: 0.3, 1.0). Isolated echogenic bowel was associated with an increased risk of congenital anomalies [risk ratio (RR) 4.54, 95% CI: 2.12, 9.73] and preterm birth (RR 2.30, 95% CI: 1.08, 4.90). Isolated pelvicalyceal dilatation was associated with an increased risk of congenital anomalies (RR 3.82, 95% CI: 2.16, 6.77). Multiple markers were associated with an increased risk of congenital anomalies (RR 5.00, 95% CI: 1.35, 18.40) and preterm birth (RR 3.38, 95% CI 1.20, 9.53).

CONCLUSIONS

These data are useful for counselling families and developing clinical guidance and care pathways following the detection of markers in clinical practice, particularly the need for follow-up scans to monitor placental function and growth in pregnancies with isolated echogenic bowel, and further investigation for multiple markers. © 2015 The Authors. Prenatal Diagnosis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

First trimester serum tests for Down's syndrome screening

BACKGROUND

Down's syndrome occurs when a person has three, rather than two copies of chromosome 21; or the specific area of chromosome 21 implicated in causing Down's syndrome. It is the commonest congenital cause of mental disability and also leads to numerous metabolic and structural problems. It can be life-threatening, or lead to considerable ill health, although some individuals have only mild problems and can lead relatively normal lives. Having a baby with Down's syndrome is likely to have a significant impact on family life.Noninvasive screening based on biochemical analysis of maternal serum or urine, or fetal ultrasound measurements, allows estimates of the risk of a pregnancy being affected and provides information to guide decisions about definitive testing. However, no test can predict the severity of problems a person with Down's syndrome will have.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review was to estimate and compare the accuracy of first trimester serum markers for the detection of Down's syndrome in the antenatal period, both as individual markers and as combinations of markers. Accuracy is described by the proportion of fetuses with Down's syndrome detected by screening before birth (sensitivity or detection rate) and the proportion of women with a low risk (normal) screening test result who subsequently had a baby unaffected by Down's syndrome (specificity).

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted a sensitive and comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE (1980 to 25 August 2011), Embase (1980 to 25 August 2011), BIOSIS via EDINA (1985 to 25 August 2011), CINAHL via OVID (1982 to 25 August 2011), The Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (The Cochrane Library 25 August 2011), MEDION (25 August 2011), The Database of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in Laboratory Medicine (25 August 2011), The National Research Register (Archived 2007), Health Services Research Projects in Progress database (25 August 2011). We did forward citation searching ISI citation indices, Google Scholar and PubMed 'related articles'. We did not apply a diagnostic test search filter. We also searched reference lists and published review articles.  

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies in which all women from a given population had one or more index test(s) compared to a reference standard (either chromosomal verification or macroscopic postnatal inspection). Both consecutive series and diagnostic case-control study designs were included. Randomised trials where individuals were randomised to different screening strategies and all verified using a reference standard were also eligible for inclusion. Studies in which test strategies were compared head-to-head either in the same women, or between randomised groups were identified for inclusion in separate comparisons of test strategies. We excluded studies if they included less than five Down's syndrome cases, or more than 20% of participants were not followed up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data as test positive or test negative results for Down's and non-Down's pregnancies allowing estimation of detection rates (sensitivity) and false positive rates (1-specificity). We performed quality assessment according to QUADAS (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies) criteria. We used hierarchical summary ROC meta-analytical methods or random-effects logistic regression methods to analyse test performance and compare test accuracy as appropriate. Analyses of studies allowing direct and indirect comparisons between tests were undertaken.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 56 studies (reported in 68 publications) involving 204,759 pregnancies (including 2113 with Down's syndrome). Studies were generally of good quality, although differential verification was common with invasive testing of only high-risk pregnancies. We evaluated 78 test combinations formed from combinations of 18 different tests, with or without maternal age; ADAM12 (a disintegrin and metalloprotease), AFP (alpha-fetoprotein), inhibin, PAPP-A (pregnancy-associated plasma protein A, ITA (invasive trophoblast antigen), free βhCG (beta human chorionic gonadotrophin), PlGF (placental growth factor), SP1 (Schwangerschafts protein 1), total hCG, progesterone, uE3 (unconjugated oestriol), GHBP (growth hormone binding protein), PGH (placental growth hormone), hyperglycosylated hCG, ProMBP (proform of eosinophil major basic protein), hPL (human placental lactogen), (free αhCG, and free ßhCG to AFP ratio. Direct comparisons between two or more tests were made in 27 studies.Meta-analysis of the nine best performing or frequently evaluated test combinations showed that a test strategy involving maternal age and a double marker combination of PAPP-A and free ßhCG significantly outperformed the individual markers (with or without maternal age) detecting about seven out of every 10 Down's syndrome pregnancies at a 5% false positive rate (FPR). Limited evidence suggested that marker combinations involving PAPP-A may be more sensitive than those without PAPP-A.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Tests involving two markers in combination with maternal age, specifically PAPP-A, free βhCG and maternal age are significantly better than those involving single markers with and without age. They detect seven out of 10 Down's affected pregnancies for a fixed 5% FPR. The addition of further markers (triple tests) has not been shown to be statistically superior; the studies included are small with limited power to detect a difference.The screening blood tests themselves have no adverse effects for the woman, over and above the risks of a routine blood test. However some women who have a 'high risk' screening test result, and are given amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling (CVS) have a risk of miscarrying a baby unaffected by Down's. Parents will need to weigh up this risk when deciding whether or not to have an amniocentesis or CVS following a 'high risk' screening test result.

Facial profile markers in second- and third-trimester fetuses with trisomy 18

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate nasal bone length (NBL), maxilla-nasion-mandible (MNM) angle, fetal profile (FP) line, prenasal thickness (PT), prenasal thickness to nasal bone length (PT:NBL) ratio and prefrontal space ratio (PFSR) as markers of trisomy 18 in the second and third trimesters of pregnancy.

METHODS

The NBL, MNM angle, FP line, PT, PT:NBL ratio and PFSR were measured retrospectively from stored two-dimensional images or three-dimensional volumes of trisomy-18 fetuses, and were compared with our previously reported normal ranges for euploid fetuses. Additional ultrasound findings were noted at initial routine second-trimester scan and at subsequent advanced ultrasound examination performed after referral for karyotyping.

RESULTS

A total of 43 trisomy-18 fetuses were included in the analysis. At initial examination, median gestational age was 21 + 2 weeks. NBL and PT were correlated with gestational age (P < 0.001), but the other markers were not. Mean NBL, MNM angle, PT, PT:NBL ratio and PFSR were 3.76 mm, 16.67°, 4.25 mm, 1.39 and 0.87, respectively. The FP line was zero (normal) in 53.7% of cases and negative (abnormal) in 46.3%. All markers were significantly associated with trisomy 18, with the PT:NBL ratio yielding the highest detection rate (88.4%) followed by NBL (83.7%), MNM angle (56.4%), FP line (46.3%), PT (27.9%) and the PFSR (20.5%) (for a 5% false-positive rate for the continuous variables). Various combinations of the four best markers (NBL, FP line, MNM angle and PT:NBL ratio) yielded detection rates of between 72% and 95%. Structural anomalies were not detected in 22% of fetuses at the initial scan and in 2% at the advanced scan.

CONCLUSIONS

The PT:NBL ratio and NBL are robust second- and third-trimester markers for trisomy 18. A negative FP line has a 0% false-positive rate and the potential to differentiate between trisomy 18 and Down syndrome, as in the latter the FP line is often positive. No major anomaly was observed at the initial scan in about a quarter of trisomy-18 fetuses, underlining the role of second-trimester facial marker evaluation.

Isolated fetal pyelectasis and the risk of Down syndrome: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

We performed a meta-analysis to examine the performance of second-trimester (14-24 weeks' gestation) isolated fetal pyelectasis as a marker for trisomy 21 and to calculate its associated weighted pooled likelihood ratios.

METHODS

PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE and Cochrane databases were searched using the terms 'pyelectasis' and 'pelviectasis'. Studies were included if fetuses with isolated pyelectasis were reported separately from fetuses with other soft markers of aneuploidy and/or structural anomalies and if knowledge of the fetal karyotype was unknown at the time of ultrasound examination.

RESULTS

Individual study statistics were pooled as weighted positive and negative likelihood ratios with 95% CIs, using a random-effects model. Ten observational studies were included (2148 cases of isolated pyelectasis). Isolated fetal pyelectasis was defined in seven out of 10 studies as a renal pelvis anteroposterior diameter of ≥ 4 mm. Isolated fetal pyelectasis was associated with pooled positive and negative likelihood ratios of 2.78 (95% CI, 1.75-4.43) and 0.99 (95% CI, 0.98-1.00), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The detection of isolated fetal pyelectasis on mid-trimester ultrasound is associated with an increased likelihood of trisomy 21. If the finding of isolated fetal pyelectasis is used to adjust the trisomy 21 risk from maternal serum screening tests, a positive likelihood ratio of 2.78 should be used in the calculation.

Role of fetal echocardiography in stepwise sequential screening for chromosomal disorders (combined test associated with modified genetic sonography)

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the contribution made by fetal echocardiography in identifying Down's syndrome (DS) and other chromosomal disorders in a stepwise sequential screening method (first step: combined test (CT), second step: modified genetic sonography (MGS) (major malformation and nuchal fold)), for DS in the general population of pregnant women.

METHODS

Prospective study. During a 5-year study period (July 2005-June 2010) 17,911 pregnant women underwent CTs with MGS (with fetal cardiac morphological evaluation performed by obstetricians in a tertiary hospital) as a screening method for DS. We evaluated the sensitivity and false positive rate (FPR) (95% confidence interval (CI)) of three screening methods for DS and all chromosomal disorders: CT, CT + MGS, and CT + fetal echocardiography.

RESULTS

A total of 17,911 cases were analyzed with 67 chromosome disorders and 45 DS cases being found. For DS, the CT sensitivity was 80% (95% CI; 68.3-91.7) (36/45) and 79.1% (95% CI; 69.4-88.8) (53/67) for all chromosome disorders, with a FPR of 4.2% (95% CI; 3.9-4.5) (752/17,866) and 4.1% (95% CI; 3.8-4.4) (735/17,844), respectively. For CT + MSG and CT + fetal echocardiography, the sensitivity for DS was 93.3% (95% CI; 85.9-0.99) (42/45) and 95.5% (95% CI; 90.5-0.99) (64/67) for all chromosome disorders. The FPR for CT + MSG was 4.8% (95% CI; 4.5-5.1) (860/17,866) and 4.6% (95% CI; 4.3-4.9) (836/17,844), respectively. The FPR of CT + fetal echocardiography was 4.4% (95% CI; 4.1-4.7) (792/17,866) for DS screening and 4.3% (95% CI; 4-4.6) (770/17,844) for chromosome abnormality screening.

CONCLUSIONS

Fetal echocardiography is highly capable of identifying DS and other chromosomal disorders as a part of genetic sonography in stepwise sequential screening.

Pränatale Detektion fetaler chromosomaler Aberrationen im 1. und 2. Trimenon

Die modernen nichtinvasiven Verfahren der pränatalen Medizin, vertreten vor allem durch das Ersttrimesterscreening, ermöglichen eine frühe Risikoeinschätzung bzgl. der häufigsten Aneuploidien. Durch die flächendeckende Anwendung dieser Methode mit derzeit weit über 4000 zertifizierten Gynäkologen bundesweit stellt dies heute einen weit verbreiteten Standard dar. Die klassische „genetische“ Sonographie, d. h. die Detektierung von Softmarkern als Hinweiszeichen für eine Aneuploidie im 2. Trimenon, hat an Bedeutung verloren. Allerdings ist der Fehlbildungsultraschall im 2. Trimenon nach wie vor von sehr großer Bedeutung und stellt den „Goldstandard“ für die Entdeckung angeborener Fehlbildungen dar. Der Pränatalmediziner muss in der Lage sein, während dieser Untersuchung Softmarker zu erkennen, um ggf. eine Reevalution des mütterlichen Risikos bzgl. Aneuploidien vorzunehmen.

Contribution of "modified genetic sonography" to the combined test as a screening method for chromosomal abnormalities

OBJECTIVES

We propose to assess the contribution of "modified genetic sonography" (MGS) to the combined test (CT) as a method of stepwise sequential screening (1st step: CT, 2nd step: MGS) for chromosome abnormalities in the general population of pregnant women.

METHODS

Prospective study. During a 4 year study period (July 2005-June 2009) 16,548 pregnancies underwent a CT combined with MGS (major malformation and nuchal fold) as a screening method for chromosome abnormalities. We assessed sensitivity and false positive rate (FPR) (95% CI).

RESULTS

We offered a chromosome abnormalities screening test to 96.6% of pregnancies (15,995 cases). 14,160 cases are analyzed (1st step: CT, 2nd step: MGS) including 49 chromosome abnormalities and 35 Down's syndrome (DS). The sensitivity of CT for DS was 77.1% [95% CI, 63.2-91] (27/35) and 77.5% for all chromosome abnormalities [95% CI, 65.8-89.2] (38/49) with a FPR of 4.4% [95% CI, 4.1-4.7]. If MGS was combined with CT, the sensitivity for DS was 91.4% [95% CI, 82.1-99] (32/35) and 93.8% for all chromosome abnormalities [95% CI, 87-99] (46/49) for a FPR of 5.1% [95% CI, 4.7-5.5].

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of an MGS to combined first-trimester screening test for aneuploidy improved sensitivity by 14.3% while only increasing the FPR by 0.7%.

Nuchal fold thickness, nasal bone absence or hypoplasia, ductus venosus reversed flow and tricuspid valve regurgitation in screening for trisomies 21, 18 and 13 in the early second trimester

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the performance of nuchal fold thickness, nasal bone hypoplasia, reversed flow in the ductus venosus and tricuspid valve regurgitation in the prediction of fetal aneuploidies in the early second trimester.

METHODS

This was a prospective study of 870 fetuses at 14 + 0 to 17 + 6 weeks of gestation, performed from 2005 to 2007. In all cases we assessed classical structural anomalies, second-trimester markers of aneuploidy including nuchal fold thickness and nasal bone length, as well as ductus venosus blood flow pattern and tricuspid valve regurgitation.

RESULTS

The study group included 37 fetuses with trisomy 21, eight with trisomy 18 and four with trisomy 13. Nasal bone hypoplasia was the single most sensitive parameter to identify fetuses with trisomy 21. Independent from maternal age, screening by assessment of nuchal fold and nasal bone identified 64.9% of cases with trisomy 21 and 66.7% of cases with trisomy 18/13 (false-positive rate (FPR), 5.8%). By including ductus venosus and tricuspid flow evaluation, the detection rate increased to 75.7% for trisomy 21 and 83.3% for trisomy 18/13 (FPR, 10.8%). Identification of fetuses with structural abnormalities combined with assessment of all four markers under investigation raised the detection rate of trisomy 21 to 83.9% and that of trisomy 18/13 to 100%. The sensitivity of classical second-trimester markers was 62.2% for trisomy 21 and 70.6% for other autosomal aneuploidies (FPR, 11.3%).

CONCLUSION

The combination of assessment of nuchal fold thickness, nasal bone hypoplasia, ductus venosus reversed flow and tricuspid regurgitation in the early second trimester is associated with a higher detection rate of autosomal trisomies compared with classical second-trimester marker screening.