Implications for Prenatal Genetic Testing in the United States after the Reversal of Roe v Wade

Prenatal genetic screening and diagnostic testing should be offered to every pregnant individual, with methods varying based on gestational age. Since Roe v Wade was overturned in June 2022, many states have implemented gestational age–based abortion restrictions. It is critical that reproductive he...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953) 2023-03, Vol.141 (3), p.445-454
Hauptverfasser: Raymond, Megan B., Barbera, Julie P., Boudova, Sarah, Vinekar, Kavita, Horgan, Rebecca, McLaren, Rodney, Al-Kouatly, Huda B.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 454
container_issue 3
container_start_page 445
container_title Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953)
container_volume 141
creator Raymond, Megan B.
Barbera, Julie P.
Boudova, Sarah
Vinekar, Kavita
Horgan, Rebecca
McLaren, Rodney
Al-Kouatly, Huda B.
description Prenatal genetic screening and diagnostic testing should be offered to every pregnant individual, with methods varying based on gestational age. Since Roe v Wade was overturned in June 2022, many states have implemented gestational age–based abortion restrictions. It is critical that reproductive health care professionals be aware of the interaction between the timing of genetic screening and diagnostic testing and the availability of legal abortion services in their state. We examined individual state abortion restrictions per publicly available data from The New York Times and the Guttmacher Institute and reviewed which genetic screening and diagnostic tests could be performed to provide results in time for individuals to decide whether to terminate their pregnancies legally in each state. As of December 11, 2022, 14 states have restrictions in which no diagnostic testing could be completed before gestational age–based cutoffs. Gestational age–based abortion restrictions may also influence a patient to favor chorionic villous sampling (CVS) over amniocentesis. There are two states, Florida and Arizona, where CVS would be feasible before the state's gestational age limit on abortion but amniocentesis would not. Both CVS and amniocentesis are feasible in 35 states, with legal challenges pending in 8 of the 35. Seven states specifically prohibit abortion for fetuses with genetic abnormalities. Clinicians may be placed in the suboptimal position of counseling patients with screening results alone before the gestational age–based ban in their state. There are several potential downstream consequences of gestational age–based termination restrictions for current genetic screening and testing paradigms, from adjustments to counseling options to potentially higher CVS procedure rates. Clinicians should be prepared for practice patterns to change to best serve patients in this evolving legal context.
doi_str_mv 10.1097/AOG.0000000000005094
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2766431269</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2766431269</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3983-ea24a4bf4283db63fcab178c294da14d012545d8e934c89484bca397cb7ce4bd3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkMtOwzAQRS0EglL4A4S8ZBPwK4m9rCoolZBABQQ7y3EmNJAmxXZa8fcYKA8xm5FGc-_cOQgdUXJKicrPRteTU_KnUqLEFhpQmfOEcf64jQaEMJXkUog9tO_9c1yimeK7aI9nmVBcyAHS08Wyqa0Jddd6XHUO3zhoTTANnkALobb4Dnyo2ydctzjMAd-3dYAS3wYTwGNTBXCf8xmswPmo6yo86wCv8IMp4QDtVKbxcLjpQ3R_cX43vkyurifT8egqsVxJnoBhwoiiEkzyssh4ZU1Bc2mZEqWhoiSUpSItJcTUViohRWENV7ktcguiKPkQnXz5Ll332sfEelF7C01jWuh6r1keX-aUxf-HSHytWtd576DSS1cvjHvTlOgPtDqi1f_RRtnx5kJfLKD8EX2z_PVdd02E4l-afg1Oz8E0Yf7pl7GUJEptXJM4yDl_B0Qtg4E</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2766431269</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Implications for Prenatal Genetic Testing in the United States after the Reversal of Roe v Wade</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>Raymond, Megan B. ; Barbera, Julie P. ; Boudova, Sarah ; Vinekar, Kavita ; Horgan, Rebecca ; McLaren, Rodney ; Al-Kouatly, Huda B.</creator><creatorcontrib>Raymond, Megan B. ; Barbera, Julie P. ; Boudova, Sarah ; Vinekar, Kavita ; Horgan, Rebecca ; McLaren, Rodney ; Al-Kouatly, Huda B.</creatorcontrib><description>Prenatal genetic screening and diagnostic testing should be offered to every pregnant individual, with methods varying based on gestational age. Since Roe v Wade was overturned in June 2022, many states have implemented gestational age–based abortion restrictions. It is critical that reproductive health care professionals be aware of the interaction between the timing of genetic screening and diagnostic testing and the availability of legal abortion services in their state. We examined individual state abortion restrictions per publicly available data from The New York Times and the Guttmacher Institute and reviewed which genetic screening and diagnostic tests could be performed to provide results in time for individuals to decide whether to terminate their pregnancies legally in each state. As of December 11, 2022, 14 states have restrictions in which no diagnostic testing could be completed before gestational age–based cutoffs. Gestational age–based abortion restrictions may also influence a patient to favor chorionic villous sampling (CVS) over amniocentesis. There are two states, Florida and Arizona, where CVS would be feasible before the state's gestational age limit on abortion but amniocentesis would not. Both CVS and amniocentesis are feasible in 35 states, with legal challenges pending in 8 of the 35. Seven states specifically prohibit abortion for fetuses with genetic abnormalities. Clinicians may be placed in the suboptimal position of counseling patients with screening results alone before the gestational age–based ban in their state. There are several potential downstream consequences of gestational age–based termination restrictions for current genetic screening and testing paradigms, from adjustments to counseling options to potentially higher CVS procedure rates. Clinicians should be prepared for practice patterns to change to best serve patients in this evolving legal context.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0029-7844</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-233X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000005094</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36649348</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</publisher><subject>Abortion, Induced ; Abortion, Legal ; Female ; Genetic Testing ; Humans ; Pregnancy ; Prenatal Diagnosis ; Reproduction ; United States</subject><ispartof>Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953), 2023-03, Vol.141 (3), p.445-454</ispartof><rights>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</rights><rights>Copyright © 2023 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3983-ea24a4bf4283db63fcab178c294da14d012545d8e934c89484bca397cb7ce4bd3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3983-ea24a4bf4283db63fcab178c294da14d012545d8e934c89484bca397cb7ce4bd3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36649348$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Raymond, Megan B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barbera, Julie P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boudova, Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vinekar, Kavita</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Horgan, Rebecca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McLaren, Rodney</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Al-Kouatly, Huda B.</creatorcontrib><title>Implications for Prenatal Genetic Testing in the United States after the Reversal of Roe v Wade</title><title>Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953)</title><addtitle>Obstet Gynecol</addtitle><description>Prenatal genetic screening and diagnostic testing should be offered to every pregnant individual, with methods varying based on gestational age. Since Roe v Wade was overturned in June 2022, many states have implemented gestational age–based abortion restrictions. It is critical that reproductive health care professionals be aware of the interaction between the timing of genetic screening and diagnostic testing and the availability of legal abortion services in their state. We examined individual state abortion restrictions per publicly available data from The New York Times and the Guttmacher Institute and reviewed which genetic screening and diagnostic tests could be performed to provide results in time for individuals to decide whether to terminate their pregnancies legally in each state. As of December 11, 2022, 14 states have restrictions in which no diagnostic testing could be completed before gestational age–based cutoffs. Gestational age–based abortion restrictions may also influence a patient to favor chorionic villous sampling (CVS) over amniocentesis. There are two states, Florida and Arizona, where CVS would be feasible before the state's gestational age limit on abortion but amniocentesis would not. Both CVS and amniocentesis are feasible in 35 states, with legal challenges pending in 8 of the 35. Seven states specifically prohibit abortion for fetuses with genetic abnormalities. Clinicians may be placed in the suboptimal position of counseling patients with screening results alone before the gestational age–based ban in their state. There are several potential downstream consequences of gestational age–based termination restrictions for current genetic screening and testing paradigms, from adjustments to counseling options to potentially higher CVS procedure rates. Clinicians should be prepared for practice patterns to change to best serve patients in this evolving legal context.</description><subject>Abortion, Induced</subject><subject>Abortion, Legal</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Genetic Testing</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Prenatal Diagnosis</subject><subject>Reproduction</subject><subject>United States</subject><issn>0029-7844</issn><issn>1873-233X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkMtOwzAQRS0EglL4A4S8ZBPwK4m9rCoolZBABQQ7y3EmNJAmxXZa8fcYKA8xm5FGc-_cOQgdUXJKicrPRteTU_KnUqLEFhpQmfOEcf64jQaEMJXkUog9tO_9c1yimeK7aI9nmVBcyAHS08Wyqa0Jddd6XHUO3zhoTTANnkALobb4Dnyo2ydctzjMAd-3dYAS3wYTwGNTBXCf8xmswPmo6yo86wCv8IMp4QDtVKbxcLjpQ3R_cX43vkyurifT8egqsVxJnoBhwoiiEkzyssh4ZU1Bc2mZEqWhoiSUpSItJcTUViohRWENV7ktcguiKPkQnXz5Ll332sfEelF7C01jWuh6r1keX-aUxf-HSHytWtd576DSS1cvjHvTlOgPtDqi1f_RRtnx5kJfLKD8EX2z_PVdd02E4l-afg1Oz8E0Yf7pl7GUJEptXJM4yDl_B0Qtg4E</recordid><startdate>20230301</startdate><enddate>20230301</enddate><creator>Raymond, Megan B.</creator><creator>Barbera, Julie P.</creator><creator>Boudova, Sarah</creator><creator>Vinekar, Kavita</creator><creator>Horgan, Rebecca</creator><creator>McLaren, Rodney</creator><creator>Al-Kouatly, Huda B.</creator><general>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20230301</creationdate><title>Implications for Prenatal Genetic Testing in the United States after the Reversal of Roe v Wade</title><author>Raymond, Megan B. ; Barbera, Julie P. ; Boudova, Sarah ; Vinekar, Kavita ; Horgan, Rebecca ; McLaren, Rodney ; Al-Kouatly, Huda B.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3983-ea24a4bf4283db63fcab178c294da14d012545d8e934c89484bca397cb7ce4bd3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Abortion, Induced</topic><topic>Abortion, Legal</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Genetic Testing</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Prenatal Diagnosis</topic><topic>Reproduction</topic><topic>United States</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Raymond, Megan B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barbera, Julie P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boudova, Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vinekar, Kavita</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Horgan, Rebecca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McLaren, Rodney</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Al-Kouatly, Huda B.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Raymond, Megan B.</au><au>Barbera, Julie P.</au><au>Boudova, Sarah</au><au>Vinekar, Kavita</au><au>Horgan, Rebecca</au><au>McLaren, Rodney</au><au>Al-Kouatly, Huda B.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Implications for Prenatal Genetic Testing in the United States after the Reversal of Roe v Wade</atitle><jtitle>Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953)</jtitle><addtitle>Obstet Gynecol</addtitle><date>2023-03-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>141</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>445</spage><epage>454</epage><pages>445-454</pages><issn>0029-7844</issn><eissn>1873-233X</eissn><abstract>Prenatal genetic screening and diagnostic testing should be offered to every pregnant individual, with methods varying based on gestational age. Since Roe v Wade was overturned in June 2022, many states have implemented gestational age–based abortion restrictions. It is critical that reproductive health care professionals be aware of the interaction between the timing of genetic screening and diagnostic testing and the availability of legal abortion services in their state. We examined individual state abortion restrictions per publicly available data from The New York Times and the Guttmacher Institute and reviewed which genetic screening and diagnostic tests could be performed to provide results in time for individuals to decide whether to terminate their pregnancies legally in each state. As of December 11, 2022, 14 states have restrictions in which no diagnostic testing could be completed before gestational age–based cutoffs. Gestational age–based abortion restrictions may also influence a patient to favor chorionic villous sampling (CVS) over amniocentesis. There are two states, Florida and Arizona, where CVS would be feasible before the state's gestational age limit on abortion but amniocentesis would not. Both CVS and amniocentesis are feasible in 35 states, with legal challenges pending in 8 of the 35. Seven states specifically prohibit abortion for fetuses with genetic abnormalities. Clinicians may be placed in the suboptimal position of counseling patients with screening results alone before the gestational age–based ban in their state. There are several potential downstream consequences of gestational age–based termination restrictions for current genetic screening and testing paradigms, from adjustments to counseling options to potentially higher CVS procedure rates. Clinicians should be prepared for practice patterns to change to best serve patients in this evolving legal context.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</pub><pmid>36649348</pmid><doi>10.1097/AOG.0000000000005094</doi><tpages>10</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0029-7844
ispartof Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953), 2023-03, Vol.141 (3), p.445-454
issn 0029-7844
1873-233X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2766431269
source MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete
subjects Abortion, Induced
Abortion, Legal
Female
Genetic Testing
Humans
Pregnancy
Prenatal Diagnosis
Reproduction
United States
title Implications for Prenatal Genetic Testing in the United States after the Reversal of Roe v Wade
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-16T09%3A16%3A56IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Implications%20for%20Prenatal%20Genetic%20Testing%20in%20the%20United%20States%20after%20the%20Reversal%20of%20Roe%20v%20Wade&rft.jtitle=Obstetrics%20and%20gynecology%20(New%20York.%201953)&rft.au=Raymond,%20Megan%20B.&rft.date=2023-03-01&rft.volume=141&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=445&rft.epage=454&rft.pages=445-454&rft.issn=0029-7844&rft.eissn=1873-233X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/AOG.0000000000005094&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2766431269%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2766431269&rft_id=info:pmid/36649348&rfr_iscdi=true