JUM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by DeVore, G. R.
Right arrow Articles by Romero, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by DeVore, G. R.
Right arrow Articles by Romero, R.

Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine, Vol 20, Issue 6 645-654, Copyright © 2001 by American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Combined use of genetic sonography and maternal serum triple-marker screening: an effective method for increasing the detection of trisomy 21 in women younger than 35 years

G. R. DeVore and R. Romero
The Perinatology Research Branch, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.

OBJECTIVE: The current standard of practice is to screen women younger than 35 years for trisomy 21 with maternal triple-marker screening, followed by amniocentesis in high-risk (1:10-1:190) patients. Non-high-risk patients are not offered further diagnostic testing. This study was conducted to determine whether genetic sonography of fetuses considered to be at moderate risk (1:190-1:1000) after maternal triple-marker screening increases the detection for trisomy 21, is cost-effective, and reduces the number of amniocenteses required to detect a single fetus with trisomy 21. METHODS: After triple-marker screening, mathematical modeling was used to classify 500,000 theoretical fetuses as high, moderate, or low risk (>1:1001-1:10,000) for trisomy 21. The sensitivity for genetic sonography varied between 60% and 90%, and false-positive rates varied between 5% and 25%. Two programs (I and II) were compared with the control program. The control program included patients with high-risk fetuses (1:10-1:190) who had amniocentesis. Program I consisted of patients in the moderate-risk group (1:191-1:1000) who had genetic sonography followed by amniocentesis only when an abnormal sonographic finding was present. Program II used an approach in which genetic sonography was done for both high- and moderate-risk fetuses, and amniocentesis was performed only when an abnormal sonographic finding was present. RESULTS: When added to the control program, genetic sonography significantly increased the detection rate of Down syndrome (range, 68.1%-77.8% versus 49%), reduced the cost of detection, and resulted in a ratio of fetuses with Down syndrome detected to normal fetuses lost because of amniocentesis of greater than 1 (range, 2.1-4.2). Compared with the control program, program II significantly increased the detection of fetuses with trisomy 21 (range, 56%-72%) when the sensitivity of genetic sonography was >70%, reduced the cost of detection, and had ratios of trisomy 21 detection to normal fetuses lost because of amniocentesis of between 2.38 and 17.88. CONCLUSION: Women younger than 35 years and classified as having moderate risk after triple-marker screening could undergo genetic sonography under 1 of 2 approaches, either of which would result in an increased detection rate of trisomy 21 and be cost-effective without increasing the loss rate of normal fetuses after genetic amniocentesis.




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2001 by the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.