Down syndrome and neural tube defect screening: the value of using gestational age by ultrasonography

Trisomy 21 with Maternally Inherited Balanced Translocation (15q;22q) in a Female Fetus: A Rare Case of Probable Interchromosomal Effect

Chromosomal rearrangements can interfere with the disjunction and segregation of other chromosome pairs not involved in the rearrangements, promoting the occurrence of numerical abnormalities in resulting gametes and predisposition to trisomy in offspring. This phenomenon of interference is known as the interchromosomal effect (ICE). Here we report a prenatal case potentially generated by ICE. The first-trimester screening ultrasound of the pregnant woman was normal, but the NIPT indicated a high risk for three copies of chromosome 21, thus suspecting trisomy 21 (T21). After a comprehensive clinical evaluation and genetic counseling, the couple decided to undergo amniocentesis. The prenatal karyotype confirmed T21 but also showed a balanced translocation between the long arm of chromosome 15 (q22) and the long arm of chromosome 22. The parents' karyotypes also showed that the mother had the 15;22 translocation. We reviewed T21 screening methods, and we performed a literature review on ICE, a generally overlooked phenomenon. We observed that ours is the first report of a prenatal case potentially due to ICE derived from the mother. The recurrence risk of aneuploidy in the offspring of translocated individuals is likely slightly increased, but it is not possible to estimate to what extent. In addition to supporting observations, there are still open questions such as, how frequent is ICE? How much is the aneuploidy risk altered by ICE?

Guideline No. 388-Determination of Gestational Age by Ultrasound

OBJECTIVE

To assist clinicians in assigning gestational age based on ultrasound biometry.

OUTCOMES

To determine whether ultrasound dating provides more accurate gestational age assessment than menstrual dating with or without the use of ultrasound. To provide maternity health care providers and researchers with evidence-based guidelines for the assignment of gestational age. To determine which ultrasound biometric parameters are superior when gestational age is uncertain. To determine whether ultrasound gestational age assessment is cost effective.

EVIDENCE

Published literature was retrieved through searches of PubMed or MEDLINE and The Cochrane Library in 2013 using appropriate controlled vocabulary and key words (gestational age, ultrasound biometry, ultrasound dating). Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized control trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies written in English. There were no date restrictions. Searches were updated on a regular basis and incorporated in the guideline to July 31, 2013. Grey (unpublished) literature was identified through searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, and national and international medical specialty societies.

VALUES

The quality of evidence in this document was rated using the criteria described in the Report of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (Table 1).

BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS

Accurate assignment of gestational age may reduce post-dates labour induction and may improve obstetric care through allowing the optimal timing of necessary interventions and the avoidance of unnecessary ones. More accurate dating allows for optimal performance of prenatal screening tests for aneuploidy. A national algorithm for the assignment of gestational age may reduce practice variations across Canada for clinicians and researchers. Potential harms include the possible reassignment of dates when significant fetal pathology (such as fetal growth restriction or macrosomia) result in a discrepancy between ultrasound biometric and clinical gestational age. Such reassignment may lead to the omission of appropriate-or the performance of inappropriate-fetal interventions.

SUMMARY STATEMENTS

RECOMMENDATIONS.

Evaluating the Agreement of Risk Categorization for Fetal Down Syndrome Screening between Ultrasound-Based Gestational Age and Menstrual-Based Gestational Age by Maternal Serum Markers

Objective

To evaluate the agreement of risk categorization for Down syndrome screening between ultrasound scan-based gestational age (GA) and last menstrual period-based gestational age in both first and second trimesters by maternal serum markers.

Methods

Data comprising 4,055 and 4,016 cases of first and second trimester screening were used. The maternal serum markers were analyzed using the ultrasound-based GA and menstrual age. The subjects whose menstrual age and ultrasound-based GA fell in different trimesters were excluded because the risk could not be calculated due to the different serum markers used in each trimester. The agreement of risk categorization for fetal Down syndrome was evaluated.

Results

The agreement of Down syndrome screening in the first and the second trimesters were 92.7% and 89%, respectively. The study found a good agreement of risk categorization by Kappa index, which was 0.615 for the overall screening. The menstrual age had a slight decrease in the detection rate and a lower false-positive rate.

Conclusion

Menstrual age is acceptable in cases of accurate last menstrual period. However, in places where ultrasonography is not readily available, gestational age estimation by menstrual age along with clinical examination that corresponds to the gestational age can be reliable.

Détermination de l'âge gestationnel par échographie

OBJECTIF

Aider les cliniciens à attribuer un âge gestationnel en fonction des résultats de la biométrie échographique.

ISSUES

Déterminer si la datation par échographie offre une évaluation plus précise de l'âge gestationnel que la datation en fonction des dernières règles avec ou sans recours à l'échographie. Offrir, aux praticiens et aux chercheurs du domaine des soins de maternité, des lignes directrices factuelles en matière d'attribution de l'âge gestationnel. Identifier les paramètres biométriques échographiques qui sont de fiabilité supérieure lorsque l'âge gestationnel est incertain. Déterminer la rentabilité de l'évaluation de l'âge gestationnel par échographie. RéSULTATS: La littérature publiée a été récupérée par l'intermédiaire de recherches menées dans PubMed ou MEDLINE et The Cochrane Library en 2013 au moyen d'un vocabulaire contrôlé et de mots clés appropriés (p. ex. « gestational age », « ultrasound biometry » et « ultrasound dating »). Les résultats ont été restreints aux analyses systématiques, aux essais comparatifs randomisés / essais cliniques comparatifs et aux études observationnelles rédigés en anglais. Aucune restriction n'a été appliquée en matière de dates. Les recherches ont été mises à jour de façon régulière et intégrées à la directive clinique jusqu'au 31 juillet 2013. La littérature grise (non publiée) a été identifiée par l'intermédiaire de recherches menées dans les sites Web d'organismes s'intéressant à l'évaluation des technologies dans le domaine de la santé et d'organismes connexes, dans des collections de directives cliniques, dans des registres d'essais cliniques et auprès de sociétés de spécialité médicale nationales et internationales.

VALEURS

La qualité des résultats est évaluée au moyen des critères décrits dans le rapport du Groupe d'étude canadien sur les soins de santé préventifs (Tableau 1). AVANTAGES, DéSAVANTAGES ET COûTS: L'attribution précise d'un âge gestationnel pourrait réduire l'incidence du déclenchement mené en raison d'une grossesse prolongée et améliorer les soins obstétricaux en nous permettant de planifier la chronologie des interventions nécessaires de façon optimale et d'éviter les interventions inutiles. Une datation plus précise permet l'optimisation de la tenue de tests prénataux de dépistage de l'aneuploïdie. Un algorithme national d'attribution de l'âge gestationnel pourrait atténuer les variations pancanadiennes en matière de pratique pour les cliniciens et les chercheurs. Parmi les désavantages potentiels, on trouve la réattribution possible des dates lorsqu'une pathologie fœtale importante (comme le retard de croissance intra-utérin ou la macrosomie) donne lieu à une divergence entre les résultats de la biométrie échographique et l'âge gestationnel clinique. Une telle réattribution pourrait mener à l'omission d'interventions fœtales justifiées ou à la tenue d'interventions fœtales injustifiées. DéCLARATIONS SOMMAIRES: RECOMMANDATIONS.

Triple test screening for Down syndrome: an Egyptian-tailored study

BACKGROUND

The incidence of Down syndrome (DS) in Egypt varies between 1:555 and 1:770 and its screening by triple test is becoming increasingly popular nowadays. Results, however, seem inaccurate due to the lack of Egyptian-specific information needed for risk calculation and a clear policy for programme implementation. Our study aimed at calculation and validation of the triple marker medians used in screening Egyptian females as well as to recommend programme conventions to unify screening in this country.

METHODS

The study was conducted on 668 Egyptian women, in weeks 15-20 of pregnancy as proven by sonar. Chorionic gonadotropin (CG), α-fetoprotein (AFP) and unconjugated oestriol (uE3) were measured on Siemens Immulite analyzer. Medians of the three parameters were calculated, regressed against gestational age (GA) and weighted by the number of participants/week. Equations were derived to adjust each parameter to the maternal weight and were centered on the median Egyptian weight. Prisca software was fed with the above data, multiples-of-median (MoM) and DS risks were calculated and the screening performance was evaluated at a mid-trimester risk cutoff of 1:270.

RESULTS

Log-linear [AFP/uE3 = 10(A+B*GA)] and exponential equations [CG = A*e (B*GA)] were derived and the regressed medians were found to follow similar patterns to other Asian and Western medians. Oestriol was always lowest (even halved) while CG and AFP were intermediate. A linear reciprocal model best fitted weight distribution among Egyptians and successfully adjusted each parameter to a weight of 78.2 kg. Epidemiological monitoring of these recommendations revealed satisfactory performance in terms of 6.7% initial positive rate and 1.00 grand MoM.

CONCLUSIONS

Adoption of the above recommendations is hoped to pave the way to a successful DS screening programme tailored to Egyptian peculiarities.

The impact of crown-rump length measurement error on combined Down syndrome screening: a simulation study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of a 5-mm error in the measurement of crown-rump length (CRL) in a woman undergoing ultrasound and biochemistry sequential combined screening for Down syndrome.

METHODS

Based on existing risk calculation algorithms, we simulated the case of a 35-year-old-woman undergoing combined screening based on nuchal translucency (NT) measurement and early second-trimester maternal serum markers (human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) and alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) expressed as multiples of the median (MoM)). Two measurement errors were considered (+ or - 5 mm), for four different CRLs (50, 60, 70 and 80 mm), with five different NT measurements (1, 1.5, 2, 2.5 and 3 mm) in a patient undergoing biochemistry testing at 14 + 4, 15, 16, 17 or 18 weeks' gestation. Four different values for each maternal serum marker were tested (1, 1.5, 2 and 2.5 MoM for hCG, and 0.5, 0.8, 1 and 1.5 MoM for AFP), leading to a total of 3200 simulations of the impact of measurement error. In all cases the ratio between the risk as assessed with or without the measurement error was calculated (measurement error-related risk ratio (MERR)).

RESULTS

Over 3200 simulated cases, MERR ranged from 0.53 to 2.14. In 586 simulations (18.3%), it was < 0.66 or > 1.33. Based on a risk cut-off of 1/300, women would have been misclassified in 112 simulations (3.5%). This would go up to 33 (27.5%) out of the 120 simulations in women with 'borderline' risk, with 1.5 MoM for hCG and 0.5 MoM for AFP, and NT measurement of 1 or 2mm.

CONCLUSION

Down syndrome screening may be highly sensitive to measurement errors in CRL. Quality control of CRL measurement should be performed together with quality control of NT measurement in order to provide the highest standard of care.

Lack of standardization in determining gestational age for prenatal screening

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether estimation of gestational age (GA) in the context of first-trimester Down syndrome screening is standardized in the Netherlands.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study, carried out between January 2005 and December 2006, of women who underwent first-trimester Down syndrome screening (n = 40,730) based on GA, maternal serum analysis and nuchal translucency (NT) measurement. Date of the last menstrual period (LMP), dating scan information including measurement of crown-rump length (CRL), NT thickness and name of the sonographer were recorded for all pregnancies. The accuracy of estimation of GA was evaluated by comparing the GA based on the LMP with that estimated from the CRL, using relevant subsets of the database. A survey of 104 sonographers was performed to further investigate the findings of the preceding analysis.

RESULTS

In 44% of all first-trimester combined tests the estimation of GA was based on the dating scan; the method of determination of GA was unknown in 23%. In 15% of all cases a dating scan was recorded but was not used to provide the estimation of GA at blood sampling. Detailed analysis showed that a consistent methodology for the estimation of GA from CRL was not maintained within hospitals and obstetric practices. For a single CRL, the reported GA differed by up to 10 days. Finally, it was demonstrated that individual sonographers reported different GAs for a given CRL.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, estimation of GA in the first trimester in the Netherlands is not standardized. To improve the performance of prenatal screening for Down syndrome, estimation of GA should be based on ultrasound examination, with one nationally accepted CRL curve.

Screening in women's health, with emphasis on fetal Down's syndrome, breast cancer and osteoporosis

Screening tests have become increasingly popular in women's health care over the last two decades. The initiative for screening is typically generated by either an agency or the health care professional being consulted for some reason. In many instances, however, the demand for screening tests is patient driven with the health care provider being poorly prepared to determine the usefulness of screening. This review illustrates the complexity of screening using three disorders where early detection and treatment have the potential to improve the quality and longevity of life. Prenatal diagnosis of Down's syndrome does not offer the parents the opportunity for cure but does offer the opportunity for education and rational choice as the impact of the diagnosis on the family is weighed. The evidence for breast cancer screening is more persuasive for older than younger women, but even in older women, there is a balance of risks and benefits. Treatment options for osteoporosis have improved in terms of reductions in fracture risk as well as beneficial effects on bone density, but evidence of the effectiveness of a screening programme for this condition in an unselected population is lacking. Ultimately, it is crucial that women be provided with clear and comprehensive information about the screening programme, in terms of possible gains but also costs of various kinds: physical, economic and psychological.

Combined first-trimester versus second-trimester serum screening for Down syndrome: a cost analysis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of combined first-trimester screening for fetal Down syndrome with second-trimester maternal serum triple screening.

STUDY DESIGN

A first-trimester screening approach that used nuchal translucency measurement and maternal serum screening was evaluated against second-trimester maternal serum triple screening in a hypothetic population. Screening sensitivities and screen-positive rates were 91% and 5% for the first-trimester approach and 70% and 7.5% for the second-trimester approach, respectively. The costs of fetal Down syndrome, live-born Down syndrome cost, and total costs (screening plus live-born costs) were calculated for each screening program.

RESULTS

First-trimester screening was associated with lower screening and live-born Down syndrome costs versus second-trimester serum screening. Total Down syndrome screening costs were 29.1% lower with first-trimester screening.

CONCLUSION

In this hypothetic model, combined first-trimester screening for fetal Down syndrome was more cost-effective than universal second-trimester triple serum screening.

Compromise ultrasound dating policy in maternal serum screening for Down syndrome

Routine ultrasound biometry is the method of choice for gestational dating when screening for Down syndrome. However, it is costly and an alternative policy is to restrict ultrasound to women most likely to have menstrual dating errors. This was evaluated by statistical modelling with parameters from 14,274 women screened between January 1997 and July 2001 using free beta-human chorionic gonadotrophin (free beta-hCG), alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) and unconjugated estriol (uE(3)). A total of 12,711 (89%) women had both ultrasound and menstrual gestations, but in 4101 (29%) women either the last menstrual period (LMP) was uncertain or a pill-withdrawal period, or there were irregular or abnormal length cycles. The LMP was not entered in the test request form for a further 1404 (9.8%) women. Routine ultrasound dating yielded a predicted detection rate higher than for menstrual dating by 3.9-7.1%, depending on the marker combination and cut-off. The false-positive rate was reduced by 0.2-1.1%. Selectively scanning the 39% with unreliable dates increased detection by 2.6-4.6%, and reduced the false-positive rate by 0.04-0.6%. Some centres only use the ultrasound estimate of gestation when it differs from the menstrual estimate by more than 7 days. Such a rule reduces the gain in detection rate to 2.5-4.6% for routine ultrasound and 1.7-3.1% with the compromise policy; the false-positive rate reductions are 0.06-0.6% and 0.0-0.3%, respectively. We conclude that if routine ultrasound is not financially and practically feasible, the compromise policy yields a clinically important improvement in screening performance compared to menstrual dating.

Advances in prenatal screening for Down syndrome: I. general principles and second trimester testing

BACKGROUND

Down syndrome is one of the most important causes of mental retardation in the population. In the absence of prenatal screening and diagnosis, prevalence at birth in the United States would currently exceed 1:600. The purpose of prenatal screening is to identify those women at the increased risk for an affected pregnancy and to maximize the options available to these women.

TESTS AVAILABLE

Second trimester serum screening involves combining the maternal age-specific risk for an affected pregnancy with the risks associated with the concentrations of maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein (MSAFP), unconjugated estriol (uE3), and human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) (triple testing). A forth analyte, inhibin-A (INH-A), is increasingly being utilized (quadruple testing). Optimal second trimester screening requires the integration of a number of clinical variables, the most important of which is an accurate assessment of gestational age. In addition to Down syndrome, the triple and quadruple tests preferentially identify fetal trisomy 18, Turner syndrome, triploidy, trisomy 16 mosaicism, fetal death, Smith-Lemli-Opitz syndrome, and steroid sulfatase deficiency. Some programs modify the Down syndrome risks generated through maternal serum screening tests with fetal biometric data obtained by ultrasound. Other second trimester tests have shown promise, including the analysis of maternal urine and fetal cells in the maternal circulation, but none are in routine clinical use.

CONCLUSION

The second trimester triple and quadruple tests provide benchmarks for evaluating new screening protocols. The combination of fetal biometry, new test development as well as clarification of the role of co-factors that affect the concentrations of analytes in existing tests should lead to greater efficacy in second trimester screening for Down syndrome.

Extreme second-trimester serum analyte values in down syndrome pregnancies with hydrops fetalis

OBJECTIVE

To compare second-trimester maternal serum analyte values in Down syndrome pregnancies with, and without, hydrops fetalis.

METHODS

Seven hydropic and 85 non-hydropic Down syndrome pregnancies were identified among women with positive second-trimester maternal serum screening results. Values for maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein (MSAFP), human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), unconjugated estriol and inhibin-A, and risks for Down syndrome were compared using the non-parametric Mann-Whitney statistical test.

RESULTS

Hydropic Down syndrome pregnancies had significantly lower MSAFP and estriol concentrations, while hCG levels were higher. For subgroups of five hydropic and 42 non-hydropic cases, no statistically significant difference in the inhibin-A levels could be demonstrated.

CONCLUSION

Second-trimester Down syndrome screening risks are significantly higher in affected pregnancies that are complicated by fetal hydrops.

Elevated maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein with low unconjugated estriol and the risk for lethal perinatal outcome

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether a combination of elevated maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein (MSAFP) and low unconjugated estriol (E3) concentration identifies pregnancies at particularly high risk for fetal abnormality or poor outcome.

METHODS

Pregnancy outcomes were reviewed for women with elevated MSAFP (> or =2.0 MoM) from our database of 50,315 women who had received triple marker testing from 1993-1998. Outcomes for those with low E3 (< or =0.7 MoM) were compared with those with normal E3 (>0.7 MoM). The incidences of fetal death, neural tube defects, chromosome abnormalities, congenital abnormalities, preterm birth, small-for-gestational age (SGA), twins, and inaccurate dates were compared in the two groups using Fisher's exact test with P < 0.05 considered significant.

RESULTS

Of the 50,315 women screened, 1,435 (2.85%) had an elevated MSAFP. Pregnancy outcomes were obtained in 94% of those with elevated MSAFP and 70% of all patients screened. Neural tube defects were present in 57 fetuses/infants (21 anencephalic, 29 spina bifida, 7 encephalocele) of which 46 (81%) had an elevated MSAFP. Of the 1,435 women with an elevated MSAFP, 199 (14%) had a low E3. Compared to those women with elevated MSAFP but normal E3, women with elevated MSAFP and low E3 were at significantly increased risk for fetal death (20.6% vs. 2.8%, relative risk (RR) 8.9), anencephaly (9.0% vs. 0.1%, RR 122.8) and chromosome abnormality (2.5% vs. 0.6%, RR 4.0).

CONCLUSIONS

Pregnancies complicated by elevated second trimester MSAFP and low E3 are at a particularly high risk (32%) for lethal perinatal outcomes. Twins, while a common cause of elevated MSAFP, are rarely found when an elevated MSAFP is associated with low E3.

Unexplained elevated midtrimester maternal serum levels of alpha fetoprotein, human chorionic gonadotropin, or low unconjugated estriol: recurrence risk and association with adverse perinatal outcome

OBJECTIVE

To determine if women experiencing an unexplained elevated maternal serum alpha fetoprotein (MSAFP; > or =2.0 MoM) or human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG; > or =2.0 MoM), or low unconjugated estriol (E3; < or =0.5 MoM) in one pregnancy are at increased risk for similar results in a subsequent pregnancy, and to determine if recurrence of these analyte extremes is associated with adverse perinatal outcome.

METHODS

We identified all women delivering two consecutive singleton pregnancies at one hospital between 1992-1997 for whom second trimester trisomy 21 serum screen was performed in each pregnancy. All screens were performed in a single laboratory. Each pregnancy delivered after 20 weeks and had gestational age confirmed by ultrasound prior to 24 weeks. Subjects were excluded if a fetal anomaly or aneuploidy was present. Adverse outcomes included abruption, oligohydramnios, preeclampsia, preterm membrane rupture, preterm delivery, stillbirth, birthweight <10th centile, and admission to neonatal intensive care unit (NICU).

RESULTS

A total of 538 women had 1,076 pregnancies meeting inclusion criteria; 12/515 (2.3%) of women with a normal MSAFP, 28/470 (6.0%) with a normal hCG, and 11/504 (2.2%) with a normal E3 in the first pregnancy had an anomalous result for the respective analyte in the second pregnancy. In contrast, only 4/23 (17.4%) patients with an elevated MSAFP (P = 0.003), 14/44 (31.8%) with an elevated hCG (P < 0.001), and 2/10 (20.0%) with a low E3 (P < 0.025) in the first pregnancy had the same analyte anomaly recur in the second pregnancy. The odds ratios for recurrent elevated MSAFP, hCG, and low E3 were 7.5, 5.3, and 9.2, respectively. Adverse perinatal outcomes occurred with similar frequency, regardless of MSAFP, hCG, or E3 results in consecutive pregnancies, using women with normal MSAFP, hCG, and E3 results in one or both pregnancies as controls.

CONCLUSIONS

Women experiencing an anomalous serum analyte in one pregnancy are at significant risk to experience the same analyte result in a subsequent pregnancy.

Second trimester maternal serum hCG level in an Asian population: normal reference values by ultrasound dating

OBJECTIVE

To establish normative data of maternal serum chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) during the second trimester in an Asian population.

METHODS

We measured the maternal serum hCG levels in 17,955 normal singleton pregnancies between 15 and 21 weeks of gestation. The gestation age was estimated by measurement of fetal biparietal distance (BPD) in all cases. Median values of hCG at various gestational weeks were calculated and the values of hCG were converted to multiple of median (MoM). The incidences of low MoM value and high MoM value were also calculated.

RESULTS

The mean and median values of hCG were 57,153 mIU/ml and 50,120 mIU/ml, respectively, at 15 weeks of gestation and then decreased to 30,898 mIU/ml and 26,226 mIU/ml, respectively, at 21 weeks. We found 8.6% and 9.4% of normal singleton pregnancies have hCG MoM values >2.0 MoM and <0.5 MoM, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our report provides a normal reference data of second trimester maternal hCG levels by ultrasound dating in an Asian population.

Predictive value of the triple screening test for the phenotype of Down syndrome

Maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein (MSAFP), human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), and unconjugated estriol (uE3) are routinely measured in the second trimester ("triple" test) and combined with maternal age to evaluate risk for fetal Down syndrome. Triple test results and clinical findings were retrospectively reviewed for 30 newborns with Down syndrome to determine whether analyte values or second trimester risks for Down syndrome were more extreme in affected pregnancies where cardiac or other severe congenital malformations were present compared to those cases where major anatomical abnormalities were absent. Mean MS-AFP, uE3, maternal age, and second trimester Down syndrome risk were all similar in the two groups of pregnancies. However, hCG concentrations did appear to be higher in the group of Down syndrome pregnancies with anatomical anomalies (mean 1.74 MoM versus 1.19 MoM) (P<0.05). Overall, there was no significant difference in the incidence of major anomalies in patients with screen-positive test results versus those cases that were not identified by the triple test. Prenatal counseling should therefore reflect the general expectations of the Down syndrome phenotype that have been established from live-born infants with this disorder.

Economic evaluation of prenatal screening for Down syndrome in the U.S.A

Maternal serum screening for Down syndrome involves biochemical tests such as alpha-fetoprotein (alpha FP), human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) and unconjugated oestriol (uE3), either alone or in combination, that have variable detection and false-positive rates. Choosing a screening protocol requires a trade-off between a desired detection rate and an acceptable false-positive rate. Selecting a screening protocol that maximizes the net benefit to society provides one approach. We have developed a general formula for calculating the per case net social benefit of a screening test and have applied it to United States data. The maximum net benefit associated with each of the various screening options currently available is estimated and the model is further applied to determine the conditions under which the addition of a new marker to an existing protocol can be justified. For each test, or combination of tests, optimal net benefits occur at different detection and false-positive rates. Net benefits are strongly and positively dependent on maternal age; high net benefits are associated with older patients and low, or even negative, net benefits with younger patients. Also, net benefits are affected by the term risk cut-off rate. For triple testing, the 1:351 Down syndrome term risk cut-off appears to provide a higher net benefit than that obtained with 1:250 or 1:300. The optimization of societal net benefit provides a powerful approach to evaluating screening strategies, but the policies used must also consider individuals' freedom in decision making at each step of the prenatal diagnosis pathway.

Obstetric sonography. Who to scan, when to scan, and by whom

Most patients in the United States have an indication for and receive sonography during pregnancy. The issue of routine sonography for low-risk women continues to be contentious even though the randomized trials have not been able to demonstrate a clear benefit. Clinics that routinely offer sonography for all pregnancies usually schedule such a procedure at 16 to 20 weeks of gestation. Although great progress is being made in the first-trimester diagnoses of congenital anomalies, most targeted studies are performed at 18 to 20 weeks of gestation. Although many private obstetricians perform in-office sonography, the highest rates of detection of congenital anomalies are seen in tertiary care settings such as a university medical center. In difficult or otherwise high-risk cases, a consulting perinatologist is commonly the physician most likely to integrate the ultrasound findings with a rational management plan for the remainder of the pregnancy and for delivery.