Ultrasound findings and multiple marker screening in trisomy 18
Objective: To compare detection of trisomy 18 in the second trimester by ultrasound and multiple-marker testing. Methods: A computerized genetics database was used to identify fetuses of 14–22 weeks’ gestation who had comprehensive ultrasound examinations, multiple-marker screening tests (alpha-feto...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953) 2000, Vol.95 (1), p.51-54 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Objective: To compare detection of trisomy 18 in the second trimester by ultrasound and multiple-marker testing.
Methods: A computerized genetics database was used to identify fetuses of 14–22 weeks’ gestation who had comprehensive ultrasound examinations, multiple-marker screening tests (alpha-fetoprotein [AFP]), hCG, unconjugated estriol [E3], and trisomy 18 karyotype. A positive trisomy 18 screen was defined as AFP up to 0.75 multiples of the median (MoM), hCG up to 0.55 MoM, and unconjugated E3 up to 0.60 MoM. A risk of at least 1:190 defined a positive Down syndrome screen. Ultrasound abnormalities were diagnosed prospectively and were confirmed later by retrospective review of sonographic images.
Results: From 1988–1997, 30 trisomy 18 fetuses who had comprehensive ultrasounds and multiple-marker testing were identified. Twenty-one (70%) had abnormalities detected by ultrasound, of which the most common isolated finding was choroid plexus cyst. Eleven fetuses (37%) had positive trisomy 18 screens, and two had positive Down syndrome screens, for a total of 13 of 30 (43%) fetuses with positive multiple-marker screening tests.
Conclusion: We found that ultrasound was more likely to be abnormal than multiple-marker screening tests in fetuses with trisomy 18 (70%) (95% confidence interval [CI] 54, 86 versus 43% CI 25, 61). However, combining the two testing methods yielded the highest detection rate (80% [CI 66%, 94%]). |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0029-7844 1873-233X |
DOI: | 10.1016/S0029-7844(99)00461-5 |