Ultrasonographically adjusted midtrimester risk of trisomy 21 and significant chromosomal defects in advanced maternal age

Ultrasound screening: Status of markers and efficacy of screening for structural abnormalities

Aneuploidy is a major cause of perinatal morbidity and mortality and can have a significant impact on expecting parents and their families. With early screening and diagnosis it is important to be able to educate parents regarding the potential impact of the diagnosis. This knowledge allows parents the opportunity to consider management options early in the pregnancy, permitting more time to mentally and emotionally prepare both for the course of the pregnancy, and after the birth of the child should the pregnancy continue. Prenatal screening provides pregnant women a non-invasive risk assessment for the most common aneuploidies. Those who are considered "high-risk" then have the option for additional diagnostic (invasive) testing. Prior to the 1980s, prenatal screening consisted of risk assessment through maternal age; however, with the advent of maternal serum biochemical analysis and ultrasound, the field of prenatal screening developed significantly. As biochemical and sonographic advances continued into the 1990s, the emphasis shifted to risk assessment in the first trimester, with the combination of maternal serum analytes and sonographic evaluation of the nuchal translucency.(1) Within the last decade, the introduction of non-invasive screening (NIPT/S) has shown great impact on the expansion and evolving practice of prenatal screening. Although in many places the standard for prenatal testing continues to include maternal serum analytes and sonographic evaluation, the role of each marker alone and in combination remains important. In the era of increasingly available screening tests, especially with NIPT/(NIPS), this article attempts to review the current role of ultrasound in prenatal care and elucidate the role of ultrasound markers in prenatal screening.

The role of the second trimester genetic sonogram in screening for fetal Down syndrome

The Genetic Sonogram is an ultrasound examination done on second trimester fetuses that not only evaluates the fetus for structural malformations, but also searches for the sonographic markers of fetal Down syndrome. The main markers that comprise the genetic sonogram include the nuchal fold, short femur and humerus, pyelectasis, hyperechoic bowel, echogenic intracardiac focus, and any major abnormality. The absence of any marker on a second trimester scan conveys a 60-80% reduction in prior risk of Down syndrome based on advanced maternal age or serum screen risk. The presence of sonographic markers, either singly or in combination, will raise the baseline risk of Down syndrome using likelihood ratios calculated for each individual marker. Using this approach, approximately 75% of fetuses with Down syndrome can be identified by modifying the patient's baseline risk according to the results of the ultrasound. The second trimester scan will likely continue to play an important role in the future in the detection of aneuploidy.

Is genetic ultrasound cost-effective?

During the past 10 years, investigators have reported studies examining the potential of second-trimester genetic sonography to identify fetuses at risk for trisomy 21. The consensus among most investigators is that genetic sonography offers an alternative to universal amniocentesis in high-risk women and lowers the loss rate of normal fetuses subjected to amniocentesis because of risk factors associated with advanced maternal age or abnormal maternal-serum screening. Although there is now consensus that genetic sonography may be a useful screening tool, there has been a paucity of data regarding its cost-effectiveness. In this review, 3 studies are examined and cost-effectiveness of genetic sonography evaluated. The first study compared genetic sonography and universal amniocentesis and found that genetic sonography was cost-effective if the sensitivity is 75% or higher, resulted in a savings to the healthcare system of 9%, and decreased the loss rate of normal fetuses following amniocentesis by 87%. The second study examined the use of genetic sonography in women less than 35 years of age who underwent maternal-serum triple-marker serum screening. Women who were screen negative but who were classified as moderate risk for trisomy 21 (risk 1:191 to 1:1,000) were offered genetic sonography. Amniocentesis was offered only if the genetic sonogram was abnormal. The study demonstrated that the use of genetic sonography in this group of patients increased the detection rate of trisomy 21, was cost effective, and was a safe procedure. The third study examined the use of genetic sonography in women 35 years of age and older who declined amniocentesis following second-trimester genetic counseling. Genetic sonography was offered to this group of patients followed by amniocentesis if an abnormal ultrasound finding was present. The data were analyzed for various acceptance rates of amniocentesis by the patient when informed of the ultrasound findings. Examination of the data demonstrated this approach increased the detection rate of trisomy 21, was cost-effective, and was a safe procedure. In conclusion, genetic sonography when applied in the above clinical settings is cost-effective, results in a higher detection rate of trisomy 21, and is safe procedure.

Use of genetic sonography for adjusting the risk for fetal Down syndrome

Systematic evaluation of ultrasound findings known to be associated with trisomy 21, at an appropriate gestational age, has been referred to as a genetic sonogram. A number of high-risk centers performing genetic sonography have reported detection of ultrasound abnormalities in the majority of fetuses with fetal Down syndrome. However, nonspecific markers are more commonly observed than structural abnormalities, which are detected in less than 20% of cases in a nonselected population. Also, the actual sensitivity of a genetic sonogram will depend on various factors including the markers sought, gestational age, reasons for referral, and of course the quality of the ultrasound. Appropriate use of a genetic sonogram can help to modify the risk of fetal Down syndrome by decreasing the risk when the ultrasound is normal, or increasing the risk when specific ultrasound markers are detected. The postultrasound risk can be estimated by applying specific likelihood ratios, reflecting the strength of individual markers, with the a priori risk based on maternal age alone, or combined with biochemical markers when known. We review this approach of age-adjusted ultrasound risk assessment for fetal Down syndrome and illustrate how the risk can be estimated. Individual sonographic markers are also discussed.

Value of humerus length shortening for prenatal detection of Down syndrome in a Thai population

OBJECTIVE

To assess the value of humerus length shortening for prenatal detection of Down syndrome in a Thai population.

METHODS

A prospective study was performed on 3053 women undergoing second-trimester amniocentesis, between 16 and 24 weeks gestation, for the indications of advanced maternal age and a past history of chromosomal abnormality. Biparietal diameter (BPD) and humerus length measurements were obtained before the procedures. Regression equations relating BPD to humerus length were used to calculate observed humerus length/expected humerus length ratio in chromosomally normal and Down syndrome fetuses. Sensitivity, specificity, false-positive rate and likelihood ratio of a positive test result at various observed humerus length/expected humerus length ratios for detection of Down syndrome were calculated. A receiver-operator characteristic curve was used to determine the threshold screening ratio.

RESULTS

There were 3003 chromosomally normal pregnancies and 24 fetuses with Down syndrome. The relationship between humerus length and BPD was: expected humerus length = 0.7403BPD - 5.1057, R2= 0.77, P < 0.001. Humerus length in Down syndrome fetuses was significantly shorter than in normal fetuses (P < 0.001). A ratio of 0.91 for observed humerus length/expected humerus length yielded a sensitivity of 41.7%, specificity of 88.3%, a false-positive rate of 11.7% and likelihood ratio of a positive test result of 3.63 (95% confidence interval 2.24-5.88) for detection of Down syndrome.

CONCLUSIONS

Humerus length shortening in the second trimester appears to be a useful adjunctive screening parameter for fetal Down syndrome in a Thai population.

A negative second trimester triple test and absence of specific ultrasonographic markers may decrease the need for genetic amniocentesis in advanced maternal age by 60%

OBJECTIVE

A study was conducted to evaluate the sensitivity of combining a second trimester triple test and targeted ultrasound in order to detect Down syndrome in women undergoing amniocentesis over 35 years of age.

METHODS

Women over 35 years of age underwent a triple test and an ultrasound examination for chromosomal markers immediately prior to genetic amniocentesis.

RESULTS

One thousand and six women were examined. Four hundred and thirty seven were triple test-positive and in 195 cases ultrasonographic abnormalities were observed. Thirteen had Down syndrome and eight had other chromosomal abnormalities. All women with Down syndrome babies were triple test-positive and seven also had ultrasonographic markers. Three of eight women who had babies with chromosomal aberrations other then Down syndrome were also triple test-positive.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the triple test as a screening tool in our population would reduce the number of amniocenteses by 60%, while no cases of Down syndrome would be missed. Ultrasonographic markers have added little to this population. Three non-Down syndrome chromosomal abnormalities and two Down syndrome mosaic cases would be missed by this approach.

Evaluation of fetal femur length to detect Down syndrome in a Thai population

OBJECTIVE

To assess the value of femur length shortening for prenatal detection of Down syndrome in a Thai population.

METHOD

A prospective study was performed by experienced perinatologists on 3137 women undergoing second-trimester amniocentesis, between 16 and 24 weeks of gestation, for the indications of advanced maternal age and past history of chromosomal abnormality. Biparietal diameter and femur length measurements were obtained before the procedures. Regression equations relating biparietal diameter to femur length were used to calculate observed femur length/expected femur length ratio in the chromosomally normal and Down syndrome fetuses. Sensitivity, specificity, false-positive rate and likelihood ratio of a positive test result at various observed femur length/expected femur length ratios for detection of Down syndrome were calculated. A receiver-operator characteristic curve was used to determine threshold screening ratio.

RESULTS

There were 3084 chromosomally normal pregnancies, 26 fetuses with Down syndrome (1:118), and 27 other chromosomal abnormalities. The relationship between femur length and biparietal diameter (BPD) was: expected femur length=-7.631+0.814 BPD, R(2)=0.78, P<0.001). Femur length in Down syndrome fetuses was significantly shorter than in normal fetuses (P<0.001). A ratio of 0.91 for observed femur length/expected femur length yielded a sensitivity of 42.3%, specificity of 86.2%, false positive rate of 13.8% and likelihood ratio of a positive test result of 3.07 (95% CI 1.94-4.84) for detection of Down syndrome.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, femur length shortening in the second trimester appears to be a useful screening parameter for fetal Down syndrome in a Thai population.

Sonographic markers of fetal aneuploidy

A variety of ultrasound findings can be identified in fetuses with fetal aneuploidy. Typical findings vary with both the chromosome abnormality and gestational age at time of the ultrasound examination. Increased NT is the primary marker during the first trimester, whereas a variety of markers may be seen during the second trimester. The presence of ultrasound markers increases the risk for fetal aneuploidy, whereas a normal ultrasound reduces the risk. Optimal risk assessment includes consideration of other risk factors including maternal age, family history, and biochemical markers. It is expected that combined risks, incorporating ultrasound findings and biochemistry, will be available in the near future. How first-trimester screening is integrated with second-trimester screening remains to be determined.

Combined ultrasound biometry, serum markers and age for Down syndrome risk estimation

OBJECTIVE

To compare Down syndrome screening efficiency of the standard serum triple analyte screen to that of a four-component screen consisting of ultrasound biometry and serum markers in the second trimester.

METHODS

The Down syndrome screening efficiency of the triple screen, i.e. alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), unconjugated estriol (E3), hCG and maternal age, was compared with the four-marker algorithm, i.e. humerus length, nuchal thickness, AFP and hCG plus maternal age. A quadrivariate Gaussian algorithm was used to calculate individual Down syndrome odds. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves plotting sensitivity against false-positive rate were constructed for each algorithm and the areas under the curves were compared to determine which was superior. Sensitivity and false-positive rates at different Down syndrome risk thresholds were also compared.

RESULTS

There were 46 cases of Down syndrome (1.9%) with 2391 normal singleton pregnancies in a referral population in which triple screen, fetal biometry and karyotype had been done. The gestational age range for the study was 14-24 completed weeks. The median maternal age for the study group was 35.0 years (14.0-46.0 years). The areas (SE) under the ROC curves were 0.75(0.04) and 0.93(0.02) for the standard triple and the four-marker screen, respectively (P < 0.001). At a 10% false-positive rate, detection was 45.7% for the triple and 80.4% for the four-marker screen.

CONCLUSIONS

A new algorithm combining humerus length and nuchal thickness measurement with serum AFP, hCG and maternal age substantially improved Down syndrome screening efficiency compared with the traditional triple screen. The model appears promising and should be evaluated in an independent data set.

Utility of minor ultrasonographic markers in the prediction of abnormal fetal karyotype at a prenatal diagnostic center

OBJECTIVE

This study was undertaken to assess the value of minor ultrasonographic markers in predicting significant karyotypic abnormalities.

STUDY DESIGN

A total of 2743 fetuses (14-24 weeks' gestation) prospectively underwent a detailed ultrasonographic survey before genetic amniocentesis. Criteria for 8 minor ultrasonographic markers were established. Odds ratios for significant karyotypic abnormalities in the presence of minor ultrasonographic markers were calculated with the chi(2) and Fisher exact tests.

RESULTS

Of the fetuses, 14.6% had a single minor ultrasonographic marker, 2.1% had >/=2 minor ultrasonographic markers, and 2.7% had >/=1 major ultrasonographic abnormality. One hundred four fetuses (3.8%) had an abnormal karyotype. Compared with a normal ultrasonographic examination result a single minor ultrasonographic marker increased the risk of karyotypic abnormality 5.7-fold (95% confidence interval, 3.5-9.3), whereas multiple minor markers increased the risk of an abnormal karyotype 12-fold (95% confidence interval, 5.5-26.5). When they were identified ultrasonographically in isolation, echogenic bowel, 2-vessel umbilical cord, echogenic intracardiac foci, choroidal separation, and choroid plexus cysts were statistically associated with an abnormal karyotype. When minor markers were identified in clusters of >/=2, echogenic bowel, short femur, 2-vessel umbilical cord, echogenic intracardiac foci, and mild ventriculomegaly were significantly predictive of karyotypic abnormality. With respect to the a priori aneuploidy risk of 1:26 and the a priori Down syndrome risk of 1:50, a normal ultrasonographic examination result reduced the risks to 1:67 and 1:120, respectively. The use of minor ultrasonographic markers in addition to major ultrasonographic abnormalities increased the detection of karyotypic abnormality from 27.9% to 68.3%. For trisomy 21 the sensitivity rose from 16.4% to 67. 3%.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant karyotypic abnormality risk assessment by ultrasonography was greatly enhanced by the addition of minor ultrasonographic markers. Further, clusters of minor ultrasonographic markers greatly increased the likelihood of karyotypic abnormality compared with a single minor marker. A completely normal ultrasonographic examination result reduced the risk of an abnormal karyotype by 62%. Inclusion of minor ultrasonographic markers in the genetic sonogram in a high-risk population will allow the detection of 68% of fetuses with karyotypic abnormalities with a false-positive rate of 17%.

Noninvasive means of identifying fetuses with possible Down syndrome: a review

Women who are 35 years or older are offered invasive prenatal testing because of the increased risk of chromosomal abnormalities, especially Down syndrome. In an attempt to increase the number of Down syndrome fetuses being detected and decrease the number of invasive procedures being performed on pregnancies not affected with a chromosome abnormality, both biochemical and ultrasound screening methods are being studied and are summarized in this article. The ultrasound markers reviewed include increased nuchal thickness, increased nuchal lucency, shortened femur, shortened humerus, pyelectasis, hypoplastic ears, echogenic intracardiac focus, hypoplasia of the fifth middle phalanx, and echogenic bowel.

Nuchal thickness, urine beta-core fragment level, and maternal age for down syndrome screening

OBJECTIVE

Our purpose was to report the midtrimester Down syndrome screening efficiency of a 2-analyte algorithm, urine beta-core fragment (a metabolite of human chorionic gonadotropin) and nuchal thickness, along with maternal age in a high-risk population undergoing genetic amniocentesis.

METHOD

Nuchal thickness, humerus length, and maternal urine beta-core fragment levels were measured prospectively before genetic amniocentesis in 1360 singleton pregnancies, 21 (1.5%) of which had fetal Down syndrome. All analyte levels were expressed as multiples of the normal medians based on biparietal diameter. Backward-stepwise logistic regression was used to determine whether the markers were significant independent predictors of fetal Down syndrome. Matrix analysis was used to calculate an adjusted Down syndrome likelihood ratio for each patient based on the significant screening markers. Multiplication by age-related midtrimester risk gave the adjusted Down syndrome risk. The sensitivity and false-positive rates at different Down syndrome screening thresholds were used to generate a receiver-operator characteristics curve. The area under the curve was used to assess the value of this screening test.

RESULTS

On the basis of logistic regression, beta-core fragment level (P 1/60 the sensitivity and false-positive rate for Down syndrome were 85.7% and 4.9%, respectively, when beta-core fragment level, nuchal thickness, and maternal age were used. Correspondence screening values at a risk threshold > 1/150 were 95.2% and 10.8%, respectively. The area under the receiver-operator characteristics curve was 0.9357 (SE = 0. 0137), indicating that the algorithm is excellent for Down syndrome screening.

CONCLUSION

In this study, a combination algorithm consisting of nuchal thickness, urine beta-core fragment level, and maternal age had a high screening efficiency for Down syndrome. This algorithm should be investigated as a new option for women at high risk of having a fetus with Down syndrome.

New Down syndrome screening algorithm: ultrasonographic biometry and multiple serum markers combined with maternal age

OBJECTIVE

We compared the Down syndrome screening efficiency of a new algorithm that combines humerus length measurement and serum analytes versus that of the traditional triple-analyte serum screen.

STUDY DESIGN

Humerus length measurements were obtained prospectively in 1743 midtrimester (14 to 24 weeks) singleton fetuses before genetic amniocentesis. All patients had triple-marker serum screening before amniocentesis. Data on humerus length were expressed as multiples of the median, and were normalized by log transformation. Backward multiple stepwise logistic regression analysis was performed to determine which combination of biometry and serum markers best predicted fetal Down syndrome. The screening efficiency of the traditional triple-analyte algorithm was compared with that of a new multivariate gaussian algorithm that combined biometry and serum markers.

RESULTS

There were 31 (1.8%) fetuses with Down syndrome in the study population. In the regression analysis humerus length, human chorionic gonadotropin, alpha-fetoprotein, and maternal age were significant predictors of Down syndrome, but unconjugated estriol was not. The combined algorithm (humerus length, human chorionic gonadotropin, and alpha-fetoprotein and age) was superior to the traditional triple screen for Down syndrome detection. The sensitivities at fixed false-positive rates were consistently higher in the combination than in the triple-screen protocol. For example, at a 10% false-positive rate the sensitivities were 65.0% and 52.3%, respectively. Similarly, at a 15% false-positive rate the sensitivities were 73.5% and 55.0%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

A new screening algorithm combining humerus length and serum analytes was superior to the traditional triple screen. Although we used a high-risk population in this study, it is expected that the observed superiority of the combination screen would persist in a population of younger women. The development of a combined biometric and serum analyte screening algorithm for estimating individual odds could represent an advance in prenatal Down syndrome screening.

An alternative for women initially declining genetic amniocentesis: individual Down syndrome odds on the basis of maternal age and multiple ultrasonographic markers

OBJECTIVE

Our purpose was to develop a method of calculating the individual odds of Down syndrome on the basis of a combination of maternal age and multiple ultrasonographic parameters that can be used to counsel women at high risk who initially decline amniocentesis.

STUDY DESIGN

Maternal age and ultrasonographic biometry data were collected prospectively on 3254 normal and 30 Down syndrome singleton fetuses between 15 and 24 weeks' gestation. Humerus length data were expressed as multiples of the normal median. Log transformation of the humerus length data permitted their expression in gaussian frequency distributions and the calculation of likelihood ratios for Down syndrome on the basis of humerus length. We also developed likelihood ratios on the basis of the degree of nuchal skinfold thickening and the presence or absence of hyperechoic fetal bowel and hypoplastic fifth digit.

RESULTS

The ultrasonographic parameters and maternal age did not significantly correlate with each other and were significant independent predictors of Down syndrome. We therefore calculated the individual odds of Down syndrome by using the product of the age-related risk and the likelihood ratios associated with nuchal thickening, humerus length shortening, and the presence or absence of hyperechoic fetal bowel or fifth digit hypoplasia, respectively. At a Down syndrome risk level of >1:50, a 60.0% detection rate with 4.5% false-positive rate was observed with a screen-positive rate of 5.5%, positive predictive value of 1:10, and odds ratio (95% confidence interval) of 28.4 (12.8 to 64.0).

CONCLUSION

This is the first report of individual odds calculation based on multiple midtrimester biometry parameters and maternal age. The screening efficiency is similar to that reported with triple-analyte serum screening. These data are useful for counseling women who are at increased Down syndrome risk and initially decline amniocentesis.

Subtle ultrasonographic anomalies: do they improve the Down syndrome detection rate?

OBJECTIVE

Our purpose was to determine whether the identification of subtle anomalies further improves Down syndrome detection over standard ultrasonographic biometry and the detection of gross morphologic defects.

STUDY DESIGN

The screening efficiency of clinodactyly, dilated renal pelvis (> or =4 mm), echogenic bowel, mild ventriculomegaly (> or =10 to 15 mm), and two-vessel cord was determined prospectively in midtrimester fetuses at amniocentesis. The screening efficiency of increased nuchal thickness and shortened long-bone length (standard biometry) and gross morphologic defects was determined for comparison. Multiple backward stepwise regression analysis was used to determine which subtle anomalies significantly correlated with Down syndrome detection rate and whether they increased Down syndrome detection over that with standard biometry and morphologic defects.

RESULTS

Although all subtle anomalies except two-vessel cord correlated with the presence of Down syndrome on univariate analysis, only echogenic bowel (Wald chi2 = 15.0211, p = 0.0001) and clinodactyly (Wald chi2 = 9.4273, p = 0.002) persisted in regression analysis of the subtle anomaly group. When either of the above-described anomalies was present, the detection rate for Down syndrome was 28.6%, p < 0.00001. For the combination of standard biometry (either increased nuchal thickness or short humerus) or gross anatomic defect, Down syndrome detection rate was 53.3% (p < 0.00000001). This increased to 63.2% (p < 0.00000001) when subtle anatomic defects (either echogenic bowel or clinodactyly) were included in the definition of an abnormal sonogram.

CONCLUSION

Subtle anomalies, of which echogenic bowel and clinodactyly are the most significant, further increase Down syndrome screening efficiency over standard biometry or the finding of gross anatomic defect. Our data appear to support the addition of subtle anomaly findings to ultrasonographic screening for Down syndrome.