-
American Journal of Obstetrics and... Jul 2017Women with a history of previous cesarean delivery, presenting with a placenta previa, have become the largest group with the highest risk for placenta previa accreta. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Women with a history of previous cesarean delivery, presenting with a placenta previa, have become the largest group with the highest risk for placenta previa accreta.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of the study was to evaluate the accuracy of ultrasound imaging in the prenatal diagnosis of placenta accreta and the impact of the depth of villous invasion on management in women presenting with placenta previa or low-lying placenta and with 1 or more prior cesarean deliveries.
STUDY DESIGN AND DATA SOURCES
We searched PubMed, Google Scholar, clinicalTrials.gov, and MEDLINE for studies published between 1982 and November 2016.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Criteria for the study were cohort studies that provided data on previous mode of delivery, placenta previa, or low-lying placenta on prenatal ultrasound imaging and pregnancy outcome. The initial search identified 171 records, of which 5 retrospective and 9 prospective cohort studies were eligible for inclusion in the quantitative analysis.
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS
The studies were scored on methodological quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool.
RESULTS
The 14 cohort studies included 3889 pregnancies presenting with placenta previa or low-lying placenta and 1 or more prior cesarean deliveries screened for placenta accreta. There were 328 cases of placenta previa accreta (8.4%), of which 298 (90.9%) were diagnosed prenatally by ultrasound. The incidence of placenta previa accreta was 4.1% in women with 1 prior cesarean and 13.3% in women with ≥2 previous cesarean deliveries. The pooled performance of ultrasound for the antenatal detection of placenta previa accreta was higher in prospective than retrospective studies, with a diagnostic odds ratios of 228.5 (95% confidence interval, 67.2-776.9) and 80.8 (95% confidence interval, 13.0-501.4), respectively. Only 2 studies provided detailed data on the relationship between the depth of villous invasion and the number of previous cesarean deliveries, independently of the depth of the villous invasion. A cesarean hysterectomy was performed in 208 of 232 cases (89.7%) for which detailed data on management were available. Positive correlations were found in the largest prospective studies between the cumulative rates of the more invasive forms of accreta placentation and the sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound imaging but not with diagnostic odds ratio values. We found no data on the ultrasound screening of placenta accreta at the routine midtrimester ultrasound examination from the nonexpert ultrasound units.
CONCLUSION
Planning individual management for delivery is possible only with accurate evaluation of prenatal risk of accreta placentation in women presenting with a low-lying placenta/previa and a history of prior cesarean delivery. Ultrasound is highly sensitive and specific in the prenatal diagnosis of accreta placentation when performed by skilled operators. Developing a prenatal screening protocol is now essential to further improve the outcome of this increasingly more common major obstetric complication.
Topics: Cesarean Section; Female; Humans; Hysterectomy; MEDLINE; Placenta Accreta; Placenta Previa; Placentation; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Outcome; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Risk Factors; Sensitivity and Specificity; Ultrasonography, Prenatal
PubMed: 28268196
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.02.050 -
Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology :... Apr 2023Universal screening for cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in pregnancy is not recommended in most countries. One of the major deterrents is the lack of effective prenatal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Universal screening for cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in pregnancy is not recommended in most countries. One of the major deterrents is the lack of effective prenatal therapy. The role of valacyclovir therapy in reducing the risk of vertical transmission, symptomatic congenital CMV infection and adverse outcome is controversial. The main aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the safety and effectiveness of prenatal valacyclovir therapy in pregnancies with maternal CMV infection.
METHODS
MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched. The inclusion criteria were pregnancy with confirmed maternal CMV infection, treated or untreated with valacyclovir. The primary outcome was the incidence of congenital CMV infection confirmed by a positive CMV polymerase chain reaction result of the amniotic fluid. The secondary outcomes were symptomatic and asymptomatic infection, perinatal death, termination of pregnancy, anomalies detected on follow-up ultrasound, on fetal magnetic resonance imaging or at birth, severe and mild-to-moderate symptoms due to congenital CMV infection, neurological, visual and hearing symptoms, and adverse events related to valacyclovir. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2) or Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool, as appropriate. Head-to-head meta-analyses were used to compare the risk of each of the explored outcomes according to whether pregnancies with maternal CMV infection were treated with prenatal valacyclovir therapy.
RESULTS
Eight studies (620 women) were included. Pregnancies treated with valacyclovir had a significantly lower risk of congenital CMV infection compared with those not receiving valacyclovir (three studies; 325 fetuses; pooled odds ratio (OR), 0.37 (95% CI, 0.21-0.64); I = 0%; P < 0.001). When stratifying the analysis according to gestational age at maternal infection, the risk of vertical transmission was significantly lower in pregnancies receiving valacyclovir following first-trimester maternal infection (three studies; 184 fetuses; pooled OR, 0.34 (95% CI, 0.15-0.74); I = 20.9%; P = 0.001), while there was no significant difference between the two groups in those acquiring CMV infection in the periconceptional period or in the third trimester of pregnancy. Only one study reported on the risk of vertical transmission in women infected in the second trimester, demonstrating a lower risk of congenital infection in women taking valacyclovir, although this was based on a small number of cases. Pregnancies treated with valacyclovir therapy had an increased likelihood of asymptomatic congenital CMV infection compared with those not receiving valacyclovir (two studies; 132 fetuses; pooled OR, 2.98 (95% CI, 1.18-7.55); I = 0%; P = 0.021), while there was no significant difference between the two groups in the risk of perinatal death (P = 0.923), termination of pregnancy (P = 0.089), anomalies detected at follow-up imaging assessment during pregnancy or at birth (P = 0.934) and symptoms due to CMV infection in the newborn (P = 0.092). The occurrence of all adverse events in pregnant individuals taking valacyclovir was 3.17% (95% CI, 1.24-5.93%) (six studies; 210 women), with 1.71% (95% CI, 0.41-3.39%) experiencing acute renal failure, which resolved after discontinuation of the drug. On GRADE assessment, the quality of evidence showing that valacyclovir reduced the risk of congenital CMV infection and adverse perinatal outcome was very low.
CONCLUSIONS
Prenatal valacyclovir administration in pregnancies with maternal CMV infection reduces the risk of congenital CMV infection. Further evidence is needed to elucidate whether valacyclovir can affect the course of infection in the fetus and the risk of symptomatic fetal or neonatal infection. © 2022 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
Topics: Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Amniotic Fluid; Cytomegalovirus Infections; Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical; Perinatal Death; Pregnancy Complications, Infectious; Prenatal Care; Valacyclovir
PubMed: 36484439
DOI: 10.1002/uog.26136 -
BMJ Open Jan 2016To measure test accuracy of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for Down, Edwards and Patau syndromes using cell-free fetal DNA and identify factors affecting accuracy. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To measure test accuracy of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for Down, Edwards and Patau syndromes using cell-free fetal DNA and identify factors affecting accuracy.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase and the Cochrane Library published from 1997 to 9 February 2015, followed by weekly autoalerts until 1 April 2015.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES
English language journal articles describing case-control studies with ≥ 15 trisomy cases or cohort studies with ≥ 50 pregnant women who had been given NIPT and a reference standard.
RESULTS
41, 37 and 30 studies of 2012 publications retrieved were included in the review for Down, Edwards and Patau syndromes. Quality appraisal identified high risk of bias in included studies, funnel plots showed evidence of publication bias. Pooled sensitivity was 99.3% (95% CI 98.9% to 99.6%) for Down, 97.4% (95.8% to 98.4%) for Edwards, and 97.4% (86.1% to 99.6%) for Patau syndrome. The pooled specificity was 99.9% (99.9% to 100%) for all three trisomies. In 100,000 pregnancies in the general obstetric population we would expect 417, 89 and 40 cases of Downs, Edwards and Patau syndromes to be detected by NIPT, with 94, 154 and 42 false positive results. Sensitivity was lower in twin than singleton pregnancies, reduced by 9% for Down, 28% for Edwards and 22% for Patau syndrome. Pooled sensitivity was also lower in the first trimester of pregnancy, in studies in the general obstetric population, and in cohort studies with consecutive enrolment.
CONCLUSIONS
NIPT using cell-free fetal DNA has very high sensitivity and specificity for Down syndrome, with slightly lower sensitivity for Edwards and Patau syndrome. However, it is not 100% accurate and should not be used as a final diagnosis for positive cases.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42014014947.
Topics: Biomarkers; Chromosome Disorders; Chromosomes, Human, Pair 13; Chromosomes, Human, Pair 18; DNA; Down Syndrome; Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Prenatal Diagnosis; Sensitivity and Specificity; Trisomy; Trisomy 13 Syndrome; Trisomy 18 Syndrome
PubMed: 26781507
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010002 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2017During pregnancy, fetal cells suitable for genetic testing can be obtained from amniotic fluid by amniocentesis (AC), placental tissue by chorionic villus sampling... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
During pregnancy, fetal cells suitable for genetic testing can be obtained from amniotic fluid by amniocentesis (AC), placental tissue by chorionic villus sampling (CVS), or fetal blood. A major disadvantage of second trimester amniocentesis is that the results are available relatively late in pregnancy (after 16 weeks' gestation). Earlier alternatives are chorionic villus sampling (CVS) and early amniocentesis, which can be performed in the first trimester of pregnancy.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this review was to compare the safety and accuracy of all types of AC (i.e. early and late) and CVS (e.g. transabdominal, transcervical) for prenatal diagnosis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (3 March 2017), ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP; 3 March 2017), and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised trials comparing AC and CVS by either transabdominal or transcervical route.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included a total of 16 randomised studies, with a total of 33,555 women, 14 of which were deemed to be at low risk of bias. The number of women included in the trials ranged from 223 to 4606.Studies were categorized into six comparisons: 1. second trimester AC versus control; 2. early versus second trimester AC; 3. CVS versus second trimester AC; 4. CVS methods; 5. Early AC versus CVS; and 6. AC with or without ultrasound.One study compared second trimester AC with no AC (control) in a low risk population (women = 4606). Background pregnancy loss was around 2%. Second trimester AC compared to no testing increased total pregnancy loss by another 1%. The confidence intervals (CI) around this excess risk were relatively large (3.2% versus 2.3 %, average risk ratio (RR) 1.41, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.00; moderate-quality evidence). In the same study, spontaneous miscarriages were also higher (2.1% versus 1.3%; average RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.52; high-quality evidence). The number of congenital anomalies was similar in both groups (2.0% versus 2.2%, average RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.39; moderate-quality evidence).One study (women = 4334) found that early amniocentesis was not a safe early alternative compared to second trimester amniocentesis because of increased total pregnancy losses (7.6% versus 5.9%; average RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.61; high-quality evidence), spontaneous miscarriages (3.6% versus 2.5%, average RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.98; moderate-quality evidence), and a higher incidence of congential anomalies, including talipes (4.7% versus 2.7%; average RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.38; high-quality evidence).When pregnancy loss after CVS was compared with second trimester AC, there was a clinically significant heterogeneity in the size and direction of the effect depending on the technique used (transabdominal or transcervical), therefore, the results were not pooled. Only one study compared transabdominal CVS with second trimester AC (women = 2234). They found no clear difference between the two procedures in the total pregnancy loss (6.3% versus 7%; average RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.23, low-quality evidence), spontaneous miscarriages (3.0% versus 3.9%; average RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.21; low-quality evidence), and perinatal deaths (0.7% versus 0.6%; average RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.40 to 3.51; low-quality evidence). Transcervical CVS may carry a higher risk of pregnancy loss (14.5% versus 11.5%; average RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.81), but the results were quite heterogeneous.Five studies compared transabdominal and transcervical CVS (women = 7978). There were no clear differences between the two methods in pregnancy losses (average RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.65; very low-quality evidence), spontaneous miscarriages (average RR 1.68, 95% CI 0.79 to 3.58; very low-quality evidence), or anomalies (average RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.12; low-quality evidence). We downgraded the quality of the evidence to low due to heterogeneity between studies. Transcervical CVS may be more technically demanding than transabdominal CVS, with more failures to obtain sample (2.0% versus 1.1%; average RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.82, moderate-quality evidence).Overall, we found low-quality evidence for outcomes when early amniocentesis was compared to transabdominal CVS. Spontaneous miscarriage was the only outcome supported by moderate-quality evidence, resulting in more miscarriages after early AC compared with transabdominal CVS (2.3% versus 1.3%; average RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.60). There were no clear differences in pregnancy losses (average RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.54; low-quality evidence), or anomalies (average RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.57 to 2.30; very low-quality evidence).We found one study that examined AC with or without ultrasound, which evaluated a type of ultrasound-assisted procedure that is now considered obsolete.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Second trimester amniocentesis increased the risk of pregnancy loss, but it was not possible to quantify this increase precisely from only one study, carried out more than 30 years ago.Early amniocentesis was not as safe as second trimester amniocentesis, illustrated by increased pregnancy loss and congenital anomalies (talipes). Transcervical chorionic villus sampling compared with second trimester amniocentesis may be associated with a higher risk of pregnancy loss, but results were quite heterogeneous.Diagnostic accuracy of different methods could not be assessed adequately because of incomplete karyotype data in most studies.
Topics: Amniocentesis; Chorionic Villi Sampling; Congenital Abnormalities; Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Trimester, First; Pregnancy Trimester, Second; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 28869276
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003252.pub2 -
American Journal of Obstetrics and... May 2023Green-stained amniotic fluid, often referred to as meconium-stained amniotic fluid, is present in 5% to 20% of patients in labor and is considered an obstetric hazard.... (Review)
Review
Green-stained amniotic fluid, often referred to as meconium-stained amniotic fluid, is present in 5% to 20% of patients in labor and is considered an obstetric hazard. The condition has been attributed to the passage of fetal colonic content (meconium), intraamniotic bleeding with the presence of heme catabolic products, or both. The frequency of green-stained amniotic fluid increases as a function of gestational age, reaching approximately 27% in post-term gestation. Green-stained amniotic fluid during labor has been associated with fetal acidemia (umbilical artery pH <7.00), neonatal respiratory distress, and seizures as well as cerebral palsy. Hypoxia is widely considered a mechanism responsible for fetal defecation and meconium-stained amniotic fluid; however, most fetuses with meconium-stained amniotic fluid do not have fetal acidemia. Intraamniotic infection/inflammation has emerged as an important factor in meconium-stained amniotic fluid in term and preterm gestations, as patients with these conditions have a higher rate of clinical chorioamnionitis and neonatal sepsis. The precise mechanisms linking intraamniotic inflammation to green-stained amniotic fluid have not been determined, but the effects of oxidative stress in heme catabolism have been implicated. Two randomized clinical trials suggest that antibiotic administration decreases the rate of clinical chorioamnionitis in patients with meconium-stained amniotic fluid. A serious complication of meconium-stained amniotic fluid is meconium aspiration syndrome. This condition develops in 5% of cases presenting with meconium-stained amniotic fluid and is a severe complication typical of term newborns. Meconium aspiration syndrome is attributed to the mechanical and chemical effects of aspirated meconium coupled with local and systemic fetal inflammation. Routine naso/oropharyngeal suctioning and tracheal intubation in cases of meconium-stained amniotic fluid have not been shown to be beneficial and are no longer recommended in obstetrical practice. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials suggested that amnioinfusion may decrease the rate of meconium aspiration syndrome. Histologic examination of the fetal membranes for meconium has been invoked in medical legal litigation to time the occurrence of fetal injury. However, inferences have been largely based on the results of in vitro experiments, and extrapolation of such findings to the clinical setting warrants caution. Fetal defecation throughout gestation appears to be a physiologic phenomenon based on ultrasound as well as in observations in animals.
Topics: Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Meconium Aspiration Syndrome; Meconium; Amniotic Fluid; Chorioamnionitis; Pregnancy Complications; Inflammation; Heme
PubMed: 37012128
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2022.11.1283 -
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 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Apr 2016To develop a practical evidence based list of clinical risk factors that can be assessed by a clinician at ≤ 16 weeks' gestation to estimate a woman's risk of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To develop a practical evidence based list of clinical risk factors that can be assessed by a clinician at ≤ 16 weeks' gestation to estimate a woman's risk of pre-eclampsia.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed and Embase databases, 2000-15.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES
Cohort studies with ≥ 1000 participants that evaluated the risk of pre-eclampsia in relation to a common and generally accepted clinical risk factor assessed at ≤ 16 weeks' gestation.
DATA EXTRACTION
Two independent reviewers extracted data from included studies. A pooled event rate and pooled relative risk for pre-eclampsia were calculated for each of 14 risk factors.
RESULTS
There were 25,356,688 pregnancies among 92 studies. The pooled relative risk for each risk factor significantly exceeded 1.0, except for prior intrauterine growth restriction. Women with antiphospholipid antibody syndrome had the highest pooled rate of pre-eclampsia (17.3%, 95% confidence interval 6.8% to 31.4%). Those with prior pre-eclampsia had the greatest pooled relative risk (8.4, 7.1 to 9.9). Chronic hypertension ranked second, both in terms of its pooled rate (16.0%, 12.6% to 19.7%) and pooled relative risk (5.1, 4.0 to 6.5) of pre-eclampsia. Pregestational diabetes (pooled rate 11.0%, 8.4% to 13.8%; pooled relative risk 3.7, 3.1 to 4.3), prepregnancy body mass index (BMI) >30 (7.1%, 6.1% to 8.2%; 2.8, 2.6 to 3.1), and use of assisted reproductive technology (6.2%, 4.7% to 7.9%; 1.8, 1.6 to 2.1) were other prominent risk factors.
CONCLUSIONS
There are several practical clinical risk factors that, either alone or in combination, might identify women in early pregnancy who are at "high risk" of pre-eclampsia. These data can inform the generation of a clinical prediction model for pre-eclampsia and the use of aspirin prophylaxis in pregnancy.
Topics: Aspirin; Body Mass Index; Chronic Disease; Cohort Studies; Early Diagnosis; Female; Humans; Hypertension, Pregnancy-Induced; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Trimester, First; Pregnancy Trimester, Second; Pregnancy in Diabetics; Prenatal Diagnosis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Reproductive Techniques, Assisted; Risk Factors
PubMed: 27094586
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.i1753 -
Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica... Jun 2019The primary aim of this systematic review was to quantify the diagnostic performance of ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging and amniotic fluid analysis in detecting... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
The primary aim of this systematic review was to quantify the diagnostic performance of ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging and amniotic fluid analysis in detecting esophageal atresia prenatally. The secondary aim was to explore the accuracy of individual imaging signs in identifying this anomaly.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched. The quality of studies was assessed using the revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Summary estimates of sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, and diagnostic odds ratio for the predictive accuracy of ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging and amniotic fluid analysis in detecting esophageal atresia were computed using the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic or DerSimonian-Laird random-effect model, according to the number of studies included in each analysis. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42017055828.
RESULTS
Twenty studies (73 246 fetuses, 1760 affected by esophageal atresia) were included. Overall, prenatal ultrasound had a sensitivity of 31.7%. Only two studies reported all data for diagnostic accuracy; based on these studies, prenatal ultrasound had a sensitivity of 41.9%, a specificity of 99.9%, a positive likelihood ratio of 88.1, a negative likelihood ratio of 0.58 and a diagnostic odds ratio of 153.7. Prenatal ultrasound correctly identified 77.9% of cases with esophageal atresia and 21.9% esophageal atresia with an associated tracheo-esophageal fistula. Polyhydramnios was present in 56.3% of cases affected by esophageal atresia, and a small or absent stomach was identified in 50.0% cases. When performed following a suspicious ultrasound, fetal magnetic resonance imaging had an good overall diagnostic accuracy for esophageal atresia, with a sensitivity of 94.7%, a specificity of 89.3%, a positive likelihood ratio of 8.8, a negative likelihood ratio of 0.06 and a diagnostic odds ratio of 149.3. Finally, amniotic fluid analysis with an esophageal atresia index ≥3 had a sensitivity of 89.9% and a specificity of 99.6% in detecting esophageal atresia.
CONCLUSIONS
Ultrasound alone is a poor diagnostic tool for identifying esophageal atresia prenatally, and has a high rate of false positive diagnoses. Magnetic resonance imaging and amniotic fluid analysis have high diagnostic accuracy for esophageal atresia. We would recommend their use following a suspicious ultrasound.
Topics: Esophageal Atresia; Humans; Prenatal Diagnosis; Reproducibility of Results
PubMed: 30659586
DOI: 10.1111/aogs.13536 -
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 -
American Journal of Obstetrics and... Apr 2023This study aimed to determine the incremental yield of prenatal exome sequencing over chromosomal microarray or G-banding karyotype in fetuses with: (1) intrauterine... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to determine the incremental yield of prenatal exome sequencing over chromosomal microarray or G-banding karyotype in fetuses with: (1) intrauterine growth restriction related to placental insufficiency or (2) short long bones, in isolated and nonisolated instances for both scenarios.
DATA SOURCES
Data were collected via electronic searches for relevant citations from January 2010 to April 10, 2022 in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane, and using relevant bibliographies and data generated in-house.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Included were prospective or retrospective cohort studies and/or case series with: (1) n>5 cases of short long bones and/or intrauterine growth restriction undergoing prenatal sequencing with a clearly defined phenotype including assessment of placental function; (2) testing based on prenatal phenotype only; (3) a nondiagnostic chromosomal microarray/karyotype; and (4) known results of genetic testing.
METHODS
Incremental yield was calculated for each study and as a pooled value for the aforementioned groups using a random-effects model. Results were displayed in forest plots with 95% confidence intervals. Heterogeneity was assessed statistically using Higgins' I. Publication bias was assessed graphically using funnel plots. Quality assessment was performed using modified Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy criteria (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews registration number CRD42022324680).
RESULTS
Nineteen studies were included (n=452 cases). The apparent incremental yields with prenatal sequencing were: (1) 4% (95% confidence interval, -5.0 to 12; I=0%) in isolated intrauterine growth restriction with evidence of placental insufficiency, (2) 30% (95% confidence interval, 13-47; I=1%) in intrauterine growth restriction with additional structural anomalies, (3) 48% (95% confidence interval, 26-70; I=73%) in isolated short long bones, and (4) 68% (95% confidence interval, 58-77; I=51%) in short long bones with additional skeletal anomalies. Of the 37 short long bone cases with a diagnosis, 32 had a skeletal dysplasia, with thanatophoric dysplasia and osteogenesis imperfecta being the most common (both 21.6% [n=8/37]). In fetuses with short long bones and additional skeletal features, osteogenesis imperfecta was the most common diagnosis (28% [n=57/204]). Where documented, the inheritance patterns were de novo in 75.4% (n=150) of cases.
CONCLUSION
Prenatal sequencing adds substantially to incremental yield over chromosomal microarray in fetuses with short long bones or multisystem intrauterine growth restriction. Robust studies are required to assess the utility of fetal sequencing in isolated intrauterine growth restriction with evidence of placental insufficiency, which cannot be recommended on the basis of current evidence.
Topics: Humans; Pregnancy; Female; Fetal Growth Retardation; Placental Insufficiency; Exome Sequencing; Retrospective Studies; Osteogenesis Imperfecta; Placenta; Prenatal Diagnosis; Ultrasonography, Prenatal
PubMed: 36209938
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2022.09.045