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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953) 2023-03, Vol.141 (3), p.445-454 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
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 & 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 & 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 & 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 & 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 |