Improvement ofmanagement tactics for pregnancy in patients at false-positive risk for fetal chromosomal abnormalities


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

Objective. To assess the risks of pregnancy complications in patients with false-positive results (FPRs) of screening for fetal chromosomal abnormalities. Subjects and methods. Combined screening was carried out to determine the risk of fetal chromosomal abnormalities in 2500 patients. The course of pregnancy and its outcomes were analyzed in 1618 cases without fetal chromosomal and structural abnormalities. Results. In accordance with the screening results, the investigators identified 2 groups: 1) FPRs of screening (n = 55); 2) its low-risk results (n = 1563). Groups 1 and 2 displayed a statistically significant difference in the incidence of the following complications: spontaneous abortions before 22 weeks of gestation (9.1% and 0.7%) (Relative risk (RR), 12.9); preterm birth (23.6% and 3.97%) (RR 5.9); birth of a low-weight fetus (16.36% and 3.67%) (RR 4.1);perinatal death (3.6% and 0.06%) (RR 113.7), respectively. Conclusion. Patients with FPRs of screening are a high-risk group for pregnancy complications.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Tamara A. Yarygina

Academician V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Perinatology Ministry of Health of Russia

Email: t_yarygina@oparina4.ru
M.D., Ultrasound and Functional Diagnostics Department, Radiology Division 117997, Россия, Москва, ул. Академика Опарина, д. 4

Roza S. Bataeva

Russian Medical Academy of Continuing Professional Education Ministry of Health of Russia; OOO "MEDICA" Fetal Medicine Center

Email: t_yarygina@oparina4.ru
M.D., Ph.D., Associate Professor, Division of Diagnostic Ultrasound; Medical Director and Consultant 101000, ul. Myasnitskaya 4, Moscow, Russia

Alexandr I. Gus

Academician V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Perinatology Ministry of Health of Russia

Email: a_gus@oparina4.ru
M.D., Doctor of Medicine, Professor, the head of Ultrasound and Functional Diagnostics Department, Radiology Division 117997, Россия, Москва, ул. Академика Опарина, д. 4

References

  1. Audibert F., De Bie I., Johnson J.A., Okun N., Wilson R.D., Armour C., Kim R. No. 348-Joint SOGC-CCMG guideline: update on prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidy, fetal anomalies, and adverse pregnancy outcomes. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2017; 39(9): 805-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogc.2017.01.032
  2. Committee on Practice Bulletins - Obstetrics, Committee on Genetics, and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Practice Bulletin No. 163: Screening for Fetal Aneuploidy. Obstet Gynecol. 2016; 127(5): e123-27. doi: 10.1097/A0G.0000000000001406
  3. Жученко Л.А., Андреева Е.Н., Одегова Н.О., Степнова С.В., Лагкуева Ф.К., Леонова, В.Ю. Современная концепция и инновационные алгоритмы пренатальной диагностики в рамках нового национального проекта Министерства здравоохранения и социального развития Российской Федерации «Дородовая (пренатальная) диагностика нарушений развития ребенка». Российский вестник акушера-гинеколога. 2011; 11(1), 8-12.3.
  4. Santorum M, Wright D, Syngelaki A., Karagioti N., Nicolaides, K.H. Accuracy of first-trimester combined test in screening for trisomies 21, 18 and 13. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017; 49(6): 714-20. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.17283
  5. Жученко Л.А., Андреева Е.Н., Голошубов П.А., Калашникова Е.А., Одегова Н.О., Юдина Е.В. Анализ результатов раннего пренатального скрининга в Российской Федерации АУДИТ-2018. Информационносправочные материалы. М.: 2018. 111 с.
  6. Pergament E., Stein A.K., Fiddler M., Cho N.H., Kupfermine M.J. Adverse pregnancy outcome after a false-positive screen for Down syndrome using multiple markers. Obstet Gynecol. 1995; 86(2): 255-8.
  7. Rodrigues L.C. False positive results of trisomy 21 prenatal screening as a surrogate marker for adverse pregnancy outcome. Diagnostico Prenat. 2013; 24(4): 135-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diapre.2013.06.004
  8. Godbole K., Kulkarni A., Kanade A., Kulkarni S., Godbole G., Wakankar A. Maternal Serum Aneuploidy Screen and Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes. J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2016; 66(Suppl 1): 141-8. doi: 10.1007/s13224-015-0826-2
  9. Baer R.J., Currier R.J., Norton M.E., Flessel M.C., Goldman S., Towner D., Jelliffe-Pawlowski L.L. Obstetric, perinatal, and fetal outcomes in pregnancies with false-positive integrated screening results. Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 123(3): 603-9. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000145
  10. Yazdani S., Rouholahnejad R., Asnafi N., Sharbatdaran M., Zakershob M., Bouzari Z. Correlation of pregnancy outcome with quadruple screening test at second trimester. Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2015; 29: 281. PMCID: PMC4764288
  11. Pylypjuk C., Espino J.M. Are false-positive maternal serum screens for fetal aneuploidy associated with adverse outcomes amongst singleton pregnancies globally? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2019; 41(5): 731. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogc.2019.02.227
  12. Dugoff L., Hobbins J.C., Malone F.D., Porter T.F., Luthy D., Comstock C.H., Hankins G., Berkowitz R.L., Merkatz I, Craigo S.D., Timor-Tritsch I.E. First-trimester maternal serum PAPP-A and free-beta subunit human chorionic gonadotropin concentrations and nuchal translucency are associated with obstetric complications: a population-based screening study (the FASTER Trial). Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004; 191(4): 1446-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/]. ajog.2004.06.052
  13. Kaijomaa M., Ulander V.M., Hamalainen E., Alfthan H., Markkanen H., Heinonen S., Stefanovic V. The risk of adverse pregnancy outcome among pregnancies with extremely low maternal PAPP-A. Prenatal diagnosis. 2016; 36(12): 1115-20. https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.4946
  14. Стрижаков А.Н., Мирющенко М.М., Игнатко И.В., Попова Н.Г., Флорова В.С., Кузнецов А.С. Прогнозирование синдрома задержки роста плода у беременных высокого риска. Акушерство и гинекология. 2017; 7: 3 4-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2017.7.34-44
  15. Холин А.М., Ходжаева З.С., Гус А.И. Патологическая плацентация и прогнозирование преэклампсии и задержки роста плода в первом триместре. Акушерство и гинекология. 2018; 5: 12-9. https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2018.5.12-19
  16. RCOG Green Top Guidline No.31. The Investigation and Management of the Small-for-Gestational Age Fetus. 2014.
  17. Zhong Y., Fufan Zhu F., Dinget Y. Serum screening in first trimester to predict pre-eclampsia, small for gestational age and preterm delivery: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth. 2015; 15: 191. doi: 10.1186/s12884-015-0608-y
  18. Poon L.C., Syngelaki A., Akolekar R., Lai J., Nicolaides K.H. Combined screening for preeclampsia and small for gestational age at 11-13 weeks. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2013; 33: 16-27. https://doi.org/10.1159/000341712
  19. Ярыгина Т.А., Батаева Р.С. Методика проведения скринингового исследования в первом триместре беременности с расчетом риска развития преэклампсии и задержки роста плода по алгоритму Фонда медицины плода (Fetal Medicine Foundation). Ультразвуковая и функциональная диагностика. 2018; 4: 77-88.
  20. Акушерско-гинекологическая база данных Astraia. Версия 1.23. Руководство пользователя. 2012; 38 с.
  21. Fenton T.R., Kim J.H. A systematic review and meta-analysis to revise the Fenton growth chart for preterm infants. BMC pediatrics. 2013; 13(1): 59. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2431-13-59
  22. Основные показатели здоровья матери и ребенка, деятельность службы охраны детства и родовспоможения в Российской Федерации за 2017 г. М.: Министерство здравоохранения Российской Федерации, 2018. 171 с.Поступила 14.06.2019 Принята в печать 21.06.2019 Received 14.06.2019 Accepted 21.06.2019

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies