-
American Journal of Obstetrics and... Feb 2015Nonimmune hydrops is the presence of ≥2 abnormal fetal fluid collections in the absence of red cell alloimmunization. The most common etiologies include... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Nonimmune hydrops is the presence of ≥2 abnormal fetal fluid collections in the absence of red cell alloimmunization. The most common etiologies include cardiovascular, chromosomal, and hematologic abnormalities, followed by structural fetal anomalies, complications of monochorionic twinning, infection, and placental abnormalities. We sought to provide evidence-based guidelines for the evaluation and management of nonimmune hydrops fetalis.
METHODS
A systematic literature review was performed using MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. The search was restricted to English-language articles published from 1966 through June 2014. Priority was given to articles reporting original research, although review articles and commentaries also were consulted. Abstracts of research presented at symposia and scientific conferences were not considered adequate for inclusion in this document. Evidence reports and guidelines published by organizations or institutions such as the National Institutes of Health, Agency for Health Research and Quality, American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine were also reviewed, and additional studies were located by reviewing bibliographies of identified articles. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology was employed for defining strength of recommendations and rating quality of evidence. Consistent with US Preventive Task Force guidelines, references were evaluated for quality based on the highest level of evidence.
RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Evaluation of hydrops begins with an antibody screen (indirect Coombs test) to determine if it is nonimmune, detailed sonography of the fetus(es) and placenta, including echocardiography and assessment for fetal arrhythmia, and middle cerebral artery Doppler evaluation for anemia, as well as fetal karyotype and/or chromosomal microarray analysis, regardless of whether a structural fetal anomaly is identified. Recommended treatment depends on the underlying etiology and gestational age; preterm delivery is recommended only for obstetric indications including development of mirror syndrome. Candidates for corticosteroids and antepartum surveillance include those with an idiopathic etiology, an etiology amenable to prenatal or postnatal treatment, and those in whom intervention is planned if fetal deterioration occurs. Such pregnancies should be delivered at a facility with the capability to stabilize and treat critically ill newborns. The prognosis depends on etiology, response to therapy if treatable, and the gestational age at detection and delivery. Aneuploidy confers a poor prognosis, and even in the absence of aneuploidy, neonatal survival is often <50%. Mirror syndrome is a form of severe preeclampsia that may develop in association with fetal hydrops and in most cases necessitates delivery.
Topics: Anemia; Arrhythmias, Cardiac; Blood Transfusion, Intrauterine; Coombs Test; Delivery, Obstetric; Drainage; Echocardiography; Female; Fetal Diseases; Humans; Hydrops Fetalis; Hydrothorax; Pregnancy; Ultrasonography, Doppler; Ultrasonography, Prenatal
PubMed: 25557883
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.12.018 -
BMJ Open Nov 2019To estimate the prevalence and incidence of placenta previa complicated by placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) and to examine the different criteria being used for the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To estimate the prevalence and incidence of placenta previa complicated by placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) and to examine the different criteria being used for the diagnosis.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Google Scholar, ClinicalTrials.gov and MEDLINE were searched between August 1982 and September 2018.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Studies reporting on placenta previa complicated by PAS diagnosed in a defined obstetric population.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two independent reviewers performed the data extraction using a predefined protocol and assessed the risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies, with difference agreed by consensus. The primary outcomes were overall prevalence of placenta previa, incidence of PAS according to the type of placenta previa and the reported clinical outcomes, including the number of peripartum hysterectomies and direct maternal mortality. The secondary outcomes included the criteria used for the prenatal ultrasound diagnosis of placenta previa and the criteria used to diagnose and grade PAS at birth.
RESULTS
A total of 258 articles were reviewed and 13 retrospective and 7 prospective studies were included in the analysis, which reported on 587 women with placenta previa and PAS. The meta-analysis indicated a significant (p<0.001) heterogeneity between study estimates for the prevalence of placenta previa, the prevalence of placenta previa with PAS and the incidence of PAS in the placenta previa cohort. The median prevalence of placenta previa was 0.56% (IQR 0.39-1.24) whereas the median prevalence of placenta previa with PAS was 0.07% (IQR 0.05-0.16). The incidence of PAS in women with a placenta previa was 11.10% (IQR 7.65-17.35).
CONCLUSIONS
The high heterogeneity in qualitative and diagnostic data between studies emphasises the need to implement standardised protocols for the diagnoses of both placenta previa and PAS, including the type of placenta previa and grade of villous invasiveness.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42017068589.
Topics: Female; Humans; Hysterectomy; Incidence; Peripartum Period; Placenta Accreta; Placenta Previa; Pregnancy; Prevalence; Ultrasonography, Prenatal
PubMed: 31722942
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031193 -
Prenatal Diagnosis May 2022We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the diagnostic yield of exome sequencing (ES) for prenatal diagnosis of fetal structural anomalies, where... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the diagnostic yield of exome sequencing (ES) for prenatal diagnosis of fetal structural anomalies, where karyotype/chromosomal microarray (CMA) is normal.
METHODS
Following electronic searches of four databases, we included studies with ≥10 structurally abnormal fetuses undergoing ES or whole genome sequencing. The incremental diagnostic yield of ES over CMA/karyotype was calculated and pooled in a meta-analysis. Sub-group analyses investigated effects of case selection and fetal phenotype on diagnostic yield.
RESULTS
We identified 72 reports from 66 studies, representing 4350 fetuses. The pooled incremental yield of ES was 31% (95% confidence interval (CI) 26%-36%, p < 0.0001). Diagnostic yield was significantly higher for cases pre-selected for likelihood of monogenic aetiology compared to unselected cases (42% vs. 15%, p < 0.0001). Diagnostic yield differed significantly between phenotypic sub-groups, ranging from 53% (95% CI 42%-63%, p < 0.0001) for isolated skeletal abnormalities, to 2% (95% CI 0%-5%, p = 0.04) for isolated increased nuchal translucency.
CONCLUSION
Prenatal ES provides a diagnosis in an additional 31% of structurally abnormal fetuses when CMA/karyotype is non-diagnostic. The expected diagnostic yield depends on the body system(s) affected and can be optimised by pre-selection of cases following multi-disciplinary review to determine that a monogenic cause is likely.
Topics: Exome; Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Trimester, First; Prenatal Diagnosis; Ultrasonography, Prenatal; Exome Sequencing
PubMed: 35170059
DOI: 10.1002/pd.6115 -
Genetics in Medicine : Official Journal... Jul 2022Noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) using cell-free DNA has been assimilated into prenatal care. Prior studies examined clinical validity and technical performance in... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) using cell-free DNA has been assimilated into prenatal care. Prior studies examined clinical validity and technical performance in high-risk populations. This systematic evidence review evaluates NIPS performance in a general-risk population.
METHODS
Medline (PubMed) and Embase were used to identify studies examining detection of Down syndrome (T21), trisomy 18 (T18), trisomy 13 (T13), sex chromosome aneuploidies, rare autosomal trisomies, copy number variants, and maternal conditions, as well as studies assessing the psychological impact of NIPS and the rate of subsequent diagnostic testing. Random-effects meta-analyses were used to calculate pooled estimates of NIPS performance (P < .05). Heterogeneity was investigated through subgroup analyses. Risk of bias was assessed.
RESULTS
A total of 87 studies met inclusion criteria. Diagnostic odds ratios were significant (P < .0001) for T21, T18, and T13 for singleton and twin pregnancies. NIPS was accurate (≥99.78%) in detecting sex chromosome aneuploidies. Performance for rare autosomal trisomies and copy number variants was variable. Use of NIPS reduced diagnostic tests by 31% to 79%. Conclusions regarding psychosocial outcomes could not be drawn owing to lack of data. Identification of maternal conditions was rare.
CONCLUSION
NIPS is a highly accurate screening method for T21, T18, and T13 in both singleton and twin pregnancies.
Topics: Cell-Free Nucleic Acids; Down Syndrome; Female; Humans; Noninvasive Prenatal Testing; Pregnancy; Prenatal Diagnosis; Sex Chromosome Aberrations; Trisomy; Trisomy 13 Syndrome; Trisomy 18 Syndrome
PubMed: 35608568
DOI: 10.1016/j.gim.2022.03.019 -
Fertility and Sterility Mar 2020To determine whether overt/subclinical hypothyroidism and/or thyroid autoimmunity is associated with recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) and whether treatment improves... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To determine whether overt/subclinical hypothyroidism and/or thyroid autoimmunity is associated with recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) and whether treatment improves outcomes.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
SETTING
University obstetrics and gynecology departments.
PATIENT(S)
Women with RPL and overt/subclinical hypothyroidism, and/or thyroid autoimmunity.
INTERVENTION(S)
None.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)
Associations between RPL and overt/subclinical hypothyroidism and/or thyroid autoimmunity and any effects of treatment.
RESULT(S)
After our review of articles from PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and CENTRAL, we found two interventional studies in which levothyroxine did not improve the subsequent live-birth rate in women with subclinical hypothyroidism with or without thyroid antibodies. A meta-analysis of five studies revealed the prevalence of subclinical hypothyroidism in RPL to be 12.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0%-35.2%). A meta-analysis of 17 studies revealed a statistically significant association between RPL and thyroid autoimmunity (odds ratio 1.94; 95% CI, 1.43-2.64). However, a randomized study suggested that levothyroxine does not benefit euthyroid women with thyroid autoimmunity.
CONCLUSION(S)
Based on the limited observational studies available, no association exists between RPL and subclinical hypothyroidism, nor does levothyroxine improve subsequent pregnancy outcomes. An association exists between RPL and thyroid autoimmunity, but levothyroxine does not improve subsequent pregnancy outcomes. Women with RPL should be screened/treated for overt thyroid disease but not thyroid autoimmunity. Thyroid antibody screening is not supported by the published studies, and further randomized studies are needed. No recommendation regarding the treatment of subclinical hypothyroidism can be made at this time; prospective and randomized studies are urgently needed.
Topics: Abortion, Habitual; Asymptomatic Diseases; Female; Humans; Hypothyroidism; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Pregnancy Outcome; Prenatal Diagnosis; Risk Factors; Thyroid Function Tests; Thyroiditis, Autoimmune
PubMed: 32192591
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.11.003 -
BJOG : An International Journal of... Jan 2021Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) causes substantial morbidity and mortality worldwide. A reliable prognostic tool for PPH has potential to aid prevention efforts.
BACKGROUND
Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) causes substantial morbidity and mortality worldwide. A reliable prognostic tool for PPH has potential to aid prevention efforts.
OBJECTIVE
Systematically to identify and appraise prognostic modelling studies for prediction of PPH.
SEARCH STRATEGY
MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library were searched using a combination of terms and synonyms including 'prediction tool', 'risk score' and 'postpartum haemorrhage'.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Any observational or experimental study developing a prognostic model for women's risk of PPH. English language publications.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Predesigned data extraction form to record: data source; participant criteria; outcome; candidate predictors; actual predictors; sample size; missing data; model development; model performance; model evaluation; interpretation.
MAIN RESULTS
Of 2146 citations screened, 14 studies were eligible for inclusion. Studies addressed populations of women who experienced placenta praevia, placenta accreta spectrum, vaginal birth, caesarean birth (CS) and the general obstetric population. All studies were at high risk of bias due to low sample size, no internal validation, suboptimal or no external validation or no reporting or handling of missing data. Five studies raised applicability concerns. Three externally validated and three internally validated studies show potential for robust external validation.
CONCLUSION
Of 14 prognostic models for PPH risk, three have some potential for clinical use: in CS, in placenta accreta spectrum disorders with MRI placental Evaluation and in placenta praevia. Future research requires robust internal and external validation of existing tools and development of a model for use in the general obstetric population.
TWEETABLE ABSTRACT
Current PPH prediction tools need external validation: one for CS, one for placenta praevia and one for placenta accreta. Tools are needed for labouring women.
Topics: Female; Humans; Postpartum Hemorrhage; Predictive Value of Tests; Pregnancy; Prenatal Care; Prenatal Diagnosis; Risk Factors
PubMed: 32575159
DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.16379 -
Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology :... Oct 2019To estimate the procedure-related risk of miscarriage after amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling (CVS) based on a systematic review of the literature and an... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To estimate the procedure-related risk of miscarriage after amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling (CVS) based on a systematic review of the literature and an updated meta-analysis.
METHODS
A search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library was carried out to identify studies reporting complications following CVS or amniocentesis. Eligible for inclusion were large controlled studies reporting data for pregnancy loss prior to 24 weeks' gestation. Study authors were contacted when required to identify additional necessary data. Data for cases that had an invasive procedure and controls were inputted into contingency tables and the risk of miscarriage was estimated for each study. Summary statistics based on a random-effects model were calculated after taking into account the weighting for each study included in the systematic review. Procedure-related risk of miscarriage was estimated as a weighted risk difference from the summary statistics for cases and controls. Subgroup analyses were performed according to the similarity in risk levels for chromosomal abnormality between the invasive-testing and control groups. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I statistic. Egger's bias was estimated to assess reporting bias in published studies.
RESULTS
The electronic search yielded 2943 potential citations, from which 12 controlled studies for amniocentesis and seven for CVS were selected for inclusion in the systematic review. A total of 580 miscarriages occurred following 63 723 amniocentesis procedures, resulting in a weighted risk of pregnancy loss of 0.91% (95% CI, 0.73-1.09%). In the control group, there were 1726 miscarriages in 330 469 pregnancies with a loss rate of 0.58% (95% CI, 0.47-0.70%). The weighted procedure-related risk of miscarriage following amniocentesis was 0.30% (95% CI, 0.11-0.49%; I = 70.1%). A total of 163 miscarriages occurred following 13 011 CVS procedures, resulting in a risk of pregnancy loss of 1.39% (95% CI, 0.76-2.02%). In the control group, there were 1946 miscarriages in 232 680 pregnancies with a loss rate of 1.23% (95% CI, 0.86-1.59%). The weighted procedure-related risk of miscarriage following CVS was 0.20% (95% CI, -0.13 to 0.52%; I = 52.7%). However, when studies including only women with similar risk profiles for chromosomal abnormality in the intervention and control groups were considered, the procedure-related risk for amniocentesis was 0.12% (95% CI, -0.05 to 0.30%; I = 44.1%) and for CVS it was -0.11% (95% CI, -0.29 to 0.08%; I = 0%).
CONCLUSIONS
The procedure-related risks of miscarriage following amniocentesis and CVS are lower than currently quoted to women. The risk appears to be negligible when these interventions were compared to control groups of the same risk profile. Copyright © 2019 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Topics: Abortion, Spontaneous; Adult; Amniocentesis; Chorionic Villi Sampling; Chromosome Aberrations; Embryo Loss; Female; Gestational Age; Humans; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Trimester, Second; Prenatal Diagnosis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Assessment
PubMed: 31124209
DOI: 10.1002/uog.20353 -
Frontiers in Pediatrics 2023This systematic review aimed to analyze the characteristics of different diagnostic techniques for micrognathia, summarize the consistent diagnostic criteria of each... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
This systematic review aimed to analyze the characteristics of different diagnostic techniques for micrognathia, summarize the consistent diagnostic criteria of each technique, and provide a simple and convenient prenatal diagnosis strategy for micrognathia.
METHODS
In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, the search was undertaken in three international databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science). The three reviewers assessed all papers and extracted the following variables: author's name and year of publication, country, study design, number of participants, gestational age, equipment for prenatal examination, biometric parameters related to micrognathia, main results.
RESULTS
A total of 25 articles included in the analysis. Nineteen articles described cross-sectional studies (76 percent), 4 (16 percent) were case-control studies, and 2 (8 percent) were cohort studies. Fifteen studies (60 percent) had a prospective design, 9 (36 percent) had a retrospective design, and one (4 percent) had both prospective and retrospective design. Thirty-two percent of the studies ( = 8) were performed in USA, and the remaining studies were performed in China ( = 4), Israel ( = 3), Netherlands ( = 3), UK ( = 1), France ( = 1), Italy ( = 1), Belgium( = 1), Germany ( = 1), Spain ( = 1), and Austria ( = 1). The prenatal diagnosis of micrognathia can be performed as early as possible in the first trimester, while the second and third trimester of pregnancy were the main prenatal diagnosis period. The articles that were included in the qualitative synthesis describe 30 biometric parameters related to the mandible.
CONCLUSION
Of the 30 biometric parameters related to the mandible, 15 can obtain the simple and convenient diagnostic criteria or warning value for micrognathia. Based on these diagnostic criteria or warning value, clinicians can quickly make a preliminary judgment on facial deformities, to carry out cytologic examination to further clarify the diagnosis of micrognathia.
PubMed: 37124181
DOI: 10.3389/fped.2023.1161421 -
Prenatal Diagnosis Jan 2022The acronym 'TORCH' refers to well-recognised causes of perinatal infections: toxoplasmosis, rubella, cytomegalovirus (CMV) and herpes simplex virus (HSV). A TORCH...
BACKGROUND
The acronym 'TORCH' refers to well-recognised causes of perinatal infections: toxoplasmosis, rubella, cytomegalovirus (CMV) and herpes simplex virus (HSV). A TORCH serology panel is often used to test for maternal primary infection following detection of ultrasound abnormalities in pregnancy.
AIM
This review aims to estimate the diagnostic yield of maternal TORCH serology in pregnancy following fetal ultrasound abnormalities.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Primary studies published since 2000 that assessed maternal TORCH serology for suspected fetal infection and included information on indications for testing, definition of positive TORCH serology results, and perinatal outcomes were included.
RESULTS
Eight studies with a total of 2538 pregnancies were included. The main indications for testing were polyhydramnios, fetal growth restriction and hyperechogenic bowel. There were 26 confirmed cases of congenital CMV, of which 15 had multiple ultrasound abnormalities. There were no cases of congenital toxoplasmosis, rubella or HSV confirmed in any of the eight studies.
CONCLUSIONS
The clinical utility of TORCH serology for non-specific ultrasound abnormalities such as isolated fetal growth restriction or isolated polyhydramnios is low. It is time to retire the TORCH acronym and the reflex ordering of 'TORCH' panels, as their continued use obscures, rather than illuminates, appropriate investigation for fetal ultrasound abnormalities.
Topics: Adult; Female; Fetus; Humans; Infections; Noninvasive Prenatal Testing; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Infectious; Pregnancy Outcome; Serology
PubMed: 34893980
DOI: 10.1002/pd.6073 -
Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology :... Jan 2022To determine the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound at 11-14 weeks' gestation in the detection of fetal cardiac abnormalities and to evaluate factors that impact the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
To determine the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound at 11-14 weeks' gestation in the detection of fetal cardiac abnormalities and to evaluate factors that impact the detection rate.
METHODS
This was a systematic review of studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound in the detection of fetal cardiac anomalies at 11-14 weeks' gestation, performed by two independent reviewers. An electronic search of four databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science Core Collection and The Cochrane Library) was conducted for studies published between January 1998 and July 2020. Prospective and retrospective studies evaluating pregnancies at any prior level of risk and in any healthcare setting were eligible for inclusion. The reference standard used was the detection of a cardiac abnormality on postnatal or postmortem examination. Data were extracted from the included studies to populate 2 × 2 tables. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model in order to determine the performance of first-trimester ultrasound in the detection of major cardiac abnormalities overall and of individual types of cardiac abnormality. Data were analyzed separately for high-risk and non-high-risk populations. Preplanned secondary analyses were conducted in order to assess factors that may impact screening performance, including the imaging protocol used for cardiac assessment (including the use of color-flow Doppler), ultrasound modality, year of publication and the index of sonographer suspicion at the time of the scan. Risk of bias and quality assessment were undertaken for all included studies using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool.
RESULTS
The electronic search yielded 4108 citations. Following review of titles and abstracts, 223 publications underwent full-text review, of which 63 studies, reporting on 328 262 fetuses, were selected for inclusion in the meta-analysis. In the non-high-risk population (45 studies, 306 872 fetuses), 1445 major cardiac anomalies were identified (prevalence, 0.41% (95% CI, 0.39-0.43%)). Of these, 767 were detected on first-trimester ultrasound examination of the heart and 678 were not detected. First-trimester ultrasound had a pooled sensitivity of 55.80% (95% CI, 45.87-65.50%), specificity of 99.98% (95% CI, 99.97-99.99%) and positive predictive value of 94.85% (95% CI, 91.63-97.32%) in the non-high-risk population. The cases diagnosed in the first trimester represented 63.67% (95% CI, 54.35-72.49%) of all antenatally diagnosed major cardiac abnormalities in the non-high-risk population. In the high-risk population (18 studies, 21 390 fetuses), 480 major cardiac anomalies were identified (prevalence, 1.36% (95% CI, 1.20-1.52%)). Of these, 338 were detected on first-trimester ultrasound examination and 142 were not detected. First-trimester ultrasound had a pooled sensitivity of 67.74% (95% CI, 55.25-79.06%), specificity of 99.75% (95% CI, 99.47-99.92%) and positive predictive value of 94.22% (95% CI, 90.22-97.22%) in the high-risk population. The cases diagnosed in the first trimester represented 79.86% (95% CI, 69.89-88.25%) of all antenatally diagnosed major cardiac abnormalities in the high-risk population. The imaging protocol used for examination was found to have an important impact on screening performance in both populations (P < 0.0001), with a significantly higher detection rate observed in studies using at least one outflow-tract view or color-flow Doppler imaging (both P < 0.0001). Different types of cardiac anomaly were not equally amenable to detection on first-trimester ultrasound.
CONCLUSIONS
First-trimester ultrasound examination of the fetal heart allows identification of over half of fetuses affected by major cardiac pathology. Future first-trimester screening programs should follow structured anatomical assessment protocols and consider the introduction of outflow-tract views and color-flow Doppler imaging, as this would improve detection rates of fetal cardiac pathology. © 2021 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
Topics: Female; Fetal Diseases; Fetal Heart; Gestational Age; Heart Defects, Congenital; Humans; Predictive Value of Tests; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Trimester, First; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Ultrasonography, Prenatal
PubMed: 34369613
DOI: 10.1002/uog.23740