Do race-specific definitions of short long bones improve the detection of down syndrome on second-trimester genetic sonograms?

Pathogenic copy number variations are associated with foetal short femur length in a tertiary referral centre study

Shortened foetal femur length (FL) is a common abnormal phenotype that often causes anxiety in pregnant women, and standard clinical treatments remain unavailable. We investigated the clinical characteristics, genetic aetiology and obstetric pregnancy outcomes of foetuses with short FL and provided a reference for perinatal management of such cases. Chromosomal microarray analysis was used to analyse the copy number variations (CNV) in short FL foetuses. Of the 218 foetuses with short FL, 33 foetuses exhibited abnormal CNVs, including 19 with pathogenic CNVs and 14 with variations of uncertain clinical significance. Of the 19 foetuses with pathogenic CNVs, four had aneuploidy, 14 had deletions/duplications, and one had pathogenic uniparental diploidy. The 7q11.23 microdeletion was detected in three foetuses. The severity of short FL was not associated with the rate of pathogenic CNVs. The duration of short FL for the intrauterine ultrasound phenotype in foetuses carrying a pathogenic CNV was independent of the gestational age. Further, maternal age was not associated with the incidence of foetal pathogenic CNVs. Adverse pregnancy outcomes occurred in 77 cases, including termination of pregnancy in 63 cases, postnatal dwarfed foetuses with intellectual disability in 11 cases, and three deaths within 3 months of birth. Pathogenic CNVs closely related to foetal short FL were identified, among which the 7q11.23 microdeletion was highly associated with short FL development. This study provides a reference for the perinatal management of foetuses with short FL.

Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Consult Series #57: Evaluation and management of isolated soft ultrasound markers for aneuploidy in the second trimester: (Replaces Consults #10, Single umbilical artery, October 2010; #16, Isolated echogenic bowel diagnosed on second-trimester ultrasound, August 2011; #17, Evaluation and management of isolated renal pelviectasis on second-trimester ultrasound, December 2011; #25, Isolated fetal choroid plexus cysts, April 2013; #27, Isolated echogenic intracardiac focus, August 2013)

Soft markers were originally introduced to prenatal ultrasonography to improve the detection of trisomy 21 over that achievable with age-based and serum screening strategies. As prenatal genetic screening strategies have greatly evolved in the last 2 decades, the relative importance of soft markers has shifted. The purpose of this document is to discuss the recommended evaluation and management of isolated soft markers in the context of current maternal serum screening and cell-free DNA screening options. In this document, "isolated" is used to describe a soft marker that has been identified in the absence of any fetal structural anomaly, growth restriction, or additional soft marker following a detailed obstetrical ultrasound examination. In this document, "serum screening methods" refers to all maternal screening strategies, including first-trimester screen, integrated screen, sequential screen, contingent screen, or quad screen. The Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine recommends the following approach to the evaluation and management of isolated soft markers: (1) we do not recommend diagnostic testing for aneuploidy solely for the evaluation of an isolated soft marker following a negative serum or cell-free DNA screening result (GRADE 1B); (2) for pregnant people with no previous aneuploidy screening and isolated echogenic intracardiac focus, echogenic bowel, urinary tract dilation, or shortened humerus, femur, or both, we recommend counseling to estimate the probability of trisomy 21 and a discussion of options for noninvasive aneuploidy screening with cell-free DNA or quad screen if cell-free DNA is unavailable or cost-prohibitive (GRADE 1B); (3) for pregnant people with no previous aneuploidy screening and isolated thickened nuchal fold or isolated absent or hypoplastic nasal bone, we recommend counseling to estimate the probability of trisomy 21 and a discussion of options for noninvasive aneuploidy screening through cell-free DNA or quad screen if cell-free DNA is unavailable or cost-prohibitive or diagnostic testing via amniocentesis, depending on clinical circumstances and patient preference (GRADE 1B); (4) for pregnant people with no previous aneuploidy screening and isolated choroid plexus cysts, we recommend counseling to estimate the probability of trisomy 18 and a discussion of options for noninvasive aneuploidy screening with cell-free DNA or quad screen if cell-free DNA is unavailable or cost-prohibitive (GRADE 1C); (5) for pregnant people with negative serum or cell-free DNA screening results and an isolated echogenic intracardiac focus, we recommend no further evaluation as this finding is a normal variant of no clinical importance with no indication for fetal echocardiography, follow-up ultrasound imaging, or postnatal evaluation (GRADE 1B); (6) for pregnant people with negative serum or cell-free DNA screening results and isolated fetal echogenic bowel, urinary tract dilation, or shortened humerus, femur, or both, we recommend no further aneuploidy evaluation (GRADE 1B); (7) for pregnant people with negative serum screening results and isolated thickened nuchal fold or absent or hypoplastic nasal bone, we recommend counseling to estimate the probability of trisomy 21 and discussion of options for no further aneuploidy evaluation, noninvasive aneuploidy screening through cell-free DNA, or diagnostic testing via amniocentesis, depending on clinical circumstances and patient preference (GRADE 1B); (8) for pregnant people with negative cell-free DNA screening results and isolated thickened nuchal fold or absent or hypoplastic nasal bone, we recommend no further aneuploidy evaluation (GRADE 1B); (9) for pregnant people with negative serum or cell-free DNA screening results and isolated choroid plexus cysts, we recommend no further aneuploidy evaluation, as this finding is a normal variant of no clinical importance with no indication for follow-up ultrasound imaging or postnatal evaluation (GRADE 1C); (10) for fetuses with isolated echogenic bowel, we recommend an evaluation for cystic fibrosis and fetal cytomegalovirus infection and a third-trimester ultrasound examination for reassessment and evaluation of growth (GRADE 1C); (11) for fetuses with an isolated single umbilical artery, we recommend no additional evaluation for aneuploidy, regardless of whether results of previous aneuploidy screening were low risk or testing was declined. We recommend a third-trimester ultrasound examination to evaluate growth and consideration of weekly antenatal fetal surveillance beginning at 36 0/7 weeks of gestation (GRADE 1C); (12) for fetuses with isolated urinary tract dilation A1, we recommend an ultrasound examination at ≥32 weeks of gestation to determine if postnatal pediatric urology or nephrology follow-up is needed. For fetuses with urinary tract dilation A2-3, we recommend an individualized follow-up ultrasound assessment with planned postnatal follow-up (GRADE 1C); (13) for fetuses with isolated shortened humerus, femur, or both, we recommend a third-trimester ultrasound examination for reassessment and evaluation of growth (GRADE 1C).

Prenatal diagnosis of genetic aberrations in fetuses with short femur detected by ultrasound: A prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the genetic aberrations in fetuses with short femur and explore the relationships with respect to degree of femoral shortening and the initial diagnostic gestational age GA.

METHODS

Singleton pregnancies with fetal short femur who consented to amniocentesis and to single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) array and Sanger sequencing for G380R mutations in FGFR3 gene were enrolled in this 5-year period prospective study. Clinical follow-up assessments were performed after birth.

RESULTS

Of a total of 161 fetuses, the prevalence of genetic aberrations was 16.2% (26/161), comprised of 65.4% (17/26) with chromosomal abnormalities and 34.6% (9/26) with G380R mutations. All fetuses with chromosomal abnormalities had FL 2-4SDs below GA. Fewer chromosomal abnormalities were detected in fetuses with short femurs presenting in the third trimester. Significantly more FGFR3 mutations were detected in fetuses with FL below -4SDs. All fetuses with FL 2-4SDs below GA diagnosed as achondroplasia were between 22 and 24 gestational weeks, and all of those diagnosed in third trimester had FL below -4SDs.

CONCLUSION

In this small cohort study, we demonstrated that different degrees of femur shortness may be attributed to different genetic aberrations. SNP array should be regarded as the first-tier test for fetuses with FL 2-4SDs below GA. The prognoses for fetuses with FL 2-4SDs below GA was significantly better than those with FL below 4SDs.

Admixture mapping identifies African and Amerindigenous local ancestry loci associated with fetal growth

Fetal growth is an important determinant of cardiometabolic disease risk during childhood and adulthood. The genetic architecture of fetal growth remains largely understudied in ancestrally diverse populations. We conducted genome-wide admixture mapping scan and analysis of genetic ancestry among Hispanic American, African American, European American, and Asian American pregnant women to identify genetic loci associated with fetal growth measures across 13-40 weeks gestation. Fetal growth measures were associated with genome-wide average African, European, Amerindigenous and East Asian ancestry proportions (P ranged from10^-3 to 4.8 × 10^-2). Admixture mapping analysis identified ten African ancestry loci and three Amerindigenous ancestry loci significantly associated with fetal growth measures at Bonferroni-corrected levels of significance (P ranged from 2.18 × 10^-8 to 3.71 × 10^-6). At the chr2q23.3-24.2 locus in which higher African ancestry was associated with long bone (femur and humerus) lengths, the T allele of rs13030825 (GALNT13) was associated with longer humerus length in African Americans (β = 0.44, P = 6.25 × 10^-6 at week 27; β = 0.39, P = 7.72 × 10^-5 at week 40). The rs13030825 SNP accounted for most of the admixture association at the chr2q23.3-24.2 locus and has substantial allele frequency difference between African and European reference samples (F_ST = 0.55, P = 0.03). Regulatory annotation shows that rs13030825 overlaps with the serum response factor (SRF) transcription factor previously implicated in postnatal bone development of mice. Overall, we identified ancestry-related maternal genetic loci that influence fetal growth, shedding light on molecular pathways that regulate fetal growth and potential effects on health across the lifespan.Clinical trials registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00912132.

Obstetrical and perinatal outcomes in fetuses with early versus late sonographic diagnosis of short femur length: A single-center, prospective, cohort study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate obstetrical and perinatal outcomes in fetuses with short femur length diagnosed before or after 24 weeks of gestation.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a prospective cohort study on singleton pregnancies with a diagnosis of fetal femur < 5 centile. Included patients were divided into two groups: patients with a first diagnosis of femur length < 5th percentile at 14-24 weeks (group A) and those with the first diagnosis made at > 24 weeks (group B).

RESULTS

147 patients were included for the analysis. Group A and group B included 66 (44.9%) and 81 (55.1%) cases. Abnormal fetal karyotype and skeletal dysplasia rates were significantly higher (27.3% vs 3.7%,P < 0.001 and 19.7% vs 3.7%, P = 0.002) in group A. Women in group B had a higher incidence of small for gestational age and intrauterine growth restriction (7.6% vs 24.7%, P = 0.007 and 19.7% vs 44.4%, P = 0.002). There was a significant higher incidence of live births in group B (34.9% vs 97.5%, P < 0.001), while the rate of termination of pregnancy was increased in group A (56.1% vs 1.2%, P < 0.001). No significant difference was found in perinatal outcomes of live births, when comparing group A and B.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of abnormal karyotype and skeletal dysplasia is higher when short femur length diagnosed earlier in gestation, while the incidence of small for gestational age, intrauterine growth restriction and the rate of live births are significantly increased when short femur length is diagnosed later during pregnancy.

Femur length parameters in fetuses with Down syndrome†

Objective: To characterize the natural history of femur length (FL) parameters across gestation in Down syndrome fetuses.Methods: Retrospective review of singletons with fetal Down syndrome delivered at our institution between January 2009 and December 2015. We assessed FL <3rd percentile for gestational age, femur length/abdominal circumference (FL/AC) ratio below 20%, and FL lag, defined as difference in weeks between obstetric gestational age and gestational age corresponding to measured FL. Ultrasound data were grouped into 6-week intervals, with initial examination at each interval selected for analysis. Relationship between FL parameters and small for gestational age (SGA) infant was evaluated.Results: During the study period, 173 pregnancies with fetal Down syndrome had 310 sonograms and subsequent delivery. Prior to 22 weeks, FL <3rd percentile occurred in 38 (26%), and FL/AC ratio below 20% occurred in 73 (51%). At each ultrasound interval, FL/AC ratio below 20% was more prevalent than FL <3rd percentile (all p<.05). Proportion with FL and FL/AC below these thresholds did not vary across gestation (all p>.05). However, FL lag increased from <1 week in the early second trimester to almost 3 weeks  ≥ 34 weeks (p<.001). SGA Down syndrome infants were not more likely to have FL <3rd percentile or FL/AC ratio below 20% than their non-SGA counterparts.Conclusion: Among Down syndrome fetuses, FL/AC ratio below 20% was approximately twice as common as FL <3rd percentile, regardless of gestational age. Neither parameter was associated with SGA. With advancing gestation, degree of FL lag progressively increased.

Midtrimester isolated short femur and perinatal outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Fetal femur length below the expected value has been described as a marker of aneuploidy, skeletal dysplasia, intrauterine growth restriction and small-for-gestational-age neonate. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the strength of association between isolated short femur length and intrauterine growth restriction or small-for-gestational-age, and perinatal adverse outcomes.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE and Medline were searched from the inception of each database to May 2018. Selection criteria included prospective and retrospective cohort studies of singleton pregnancies between 18 and 28 weeks of gestation, with sonographic finding of isolated short femur length, without any structural chromosomal abnormality. The meta-analysis was performed by computing odds ratios using both fixed and random-effects models. Quality assessment of the included studies was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

Six studies including 3078 cases of isolated short femur length (study group) and 222 303 normal femur length (control group) were included. The prevalence of intrauterine growth restriction or small-for-gestational-age in the study group was 14.2%, compared with 5.2% in the control group (odds ratio of 4.04, 95% confidence interval 3.63-4.50). Isolated short femur length was associated with a higher incidence of low birthweight (study group: 22.10% vs control group: 8.57%, odds ratio 3.24, 95% confidence interval 2.34-4.48), Apgar <7 at 5 minutes (study group: 3.98% vs control group: 1.79%, odds ratio 3.56, 95% confidence interval 1.87-6.77), preterm birth (study group: 12.16% vs control group: 8.16%, odds ratio 3.09, 95% confidence interval 1.57-6.08), fetal death (study group: 1.83% vs control group: 0.44%, odds ratio 6.48, 95% confidence interval 3.70-11.35) and neonatal intensive care unit admission (study group: 15.34% vs control group: 14.81%, odds ratio 2.11, 95% confidence interval 0.56-7.93).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a significant association between isolated short femur length and intrauterine growth restriction or small-for-gestational-age and poor perinatal outcome.

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.

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.

Isolated short femur length on second-trimester sonography: a marker for fetal growth restriction and other adverse perinatal outcomes

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the association between isolated second-trimester short femur length and fetal growth restriction as well as other adverse perinatal outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with singleton gestations presenting for sonography between 16 and 24 weeks' gestation from 1990 to 2009. Cases of aneuploidy, skeletal dysplasia, and major anomalies were excluded. Short femur length was defined as length below the 10th percentile for gestational age and was considered isolated when both the estimated fetal weight and abdominal circumference were above the 10th percentile for gestational age. Isolated short femur length below the 5th percentile was also evaluated. The primary outcome was fetal growth restriction, defined as birth weight below the 10th percentile. Secondary outcomes included preeclampsia and preterm birth before 37 and 34 weeks. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to estimate the risk of these outcomes in fetuses with isolated short femur length.

RESULTS

Of 73,884 patients, 569 (0.8%) had a fetus with a femur length below the 10th percentile, of which 268 (47.1%) were isolated; 210 patients (0.3%) had a fetus with a femur length below the 5th percentile, of which 34 (16.2%) were isolated. Isolated short femur lengths below the 10th and 5th percentiles were associated with an increased risk of fetal growth restriction (<10th: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.4-4.6; <5th: aOR, 4.6; 95% CI, 2.0-10.7) and also with an increased risk of preterm birth before 37 and 34 weeks. There was no significant association between isolated short femur length and preeclampsia.

CONCLUSIONS

Isolated short femur length on second-trimester sonography is associated with a greater than 3-fold increased risk of fetal growth restriction and an increased risk of preterm birth. Serial growth assessment may be warranted in these cases.