Literature DB >> 10376859

MULTISCAN--a Scandinavian multicenter second trimester obstetric ultrasound and serum screening study.

F S Jørgensen1, L Valentin, K A Salvesen, C Jørgensen, F R Jensen, J Bang, S H Eik-Nes, M Madsen, K Marsal, P H Persson, J Philip, J W Bogstad, B Nørgaard-Pedersen.   

Abstract

AIM: To study the detection rates of second trimester ultrasound screening for neural tube defects (NTD), abdominal wall defects (AWD) and Down's syndrome (DS) in low risk populations at tertiary centers, and to compare the ultrasound screening detection rates with those that were obtainable by biochemical serum screening (double test: alpha-fetoprotein/human chorion gonadotrophin/age test). STUDY
DESIGN: Prospective multicenter study with a three year inclusion period: 1/1/1989-31/12/1991.
SUBJECTS: 27,844 low-risk women at 18-34 years of age who had a second trimester ultrasound screening examination. Of these, 10,264 also had a serum test.
METHODS: An ultrasound malformation scan and a serum test were carried out at 17-19 weeks of gestation. Risk calculations regarding DS were based on alpha-fetoprotein, human chorion gonadotrophin and maternal age; performed retrospectively for the first two years.
RESULTS: In total 73 cases were identified in the study population: NTD (n=34), AWD (n=7) and DS (n=32). The detection rates, (%, with 95% confidence interval) for ultrasound screening were: NTD: 79.4 (62.1-91.3); AWD: 85.7 (42.1-99.6); DS: 6.3 (0.8-20.8). In the subgroup of women who had both tests, the detection rates for ultrasound screening vs double test were: NTD: 62.5 (24.5-91.5) vs 75.0 (34.9-96.8); AWD: 66.7 (9.4-99.2) vs 100 (29.2-100.0); DS: 7.7 (0.2-36.0) vs 46.2 (19.2-74.9). The false positive rates (%) for ultrasound screening vs double test were: NTD: 0.01/3.3; AWD: 0.01/3.3; DS: 0.1/4.0.
CONCLUSION: Second trimester ultrasound screening in a low risk population gave a low detection rate for fetal DS (6.3%) and an acceptable detection rate for NTD (79.4%) and AWD (85.7%). In the subgroup of women who had both tests, serum screening performed better than ultrasound as applied in the present study, especially regarding DS.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10376859

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand        ISSN: 0001-6349            Impact factor:   3.636


  6 in total

1.  Screening for Down's syndrome. Biochemical screening offers advantages.

Authors:  P A Boyd; M Jefferies; P F Chamberlain; A J Crocker
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-09-23

Review 2.  First trimester ultrasound tests alone or in combination with first trimester serum tests for Down's syndrome screening.

Authors:  S Kate Alldred; Yemisi Takwoingi; Boliang Guo; Mary Pennant; Jonathan J Deeks; James P Neilson; Zarko Alfirevic
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-03-15

Review 3.  First and second trimester serum tests with and without first trimester ultrasound tests for Down's syndrome screening.

Authors:  S Kate Alldred; Yemisi Takwoingi; Boliang Guo; Mary Pennant; Jonathan J Deeks; James P Neilson; Zarko Alfirevic
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-03-15

Review 4.  Second trimester serum tests for Down's Syndrome screening.

Authors:  S Kate Alldred; Jonathan J Deeks; Boliang Guo; James P Neilson; Zarko Alfirevic
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2012-06-13

Review 5.  First trimester serum tests for Down's syndrome screening.

Authors:  S Kate Alldred; Yemisi Takwoingi; Boliang Guo; Mary Pennant; Jonathan J Deeks; James P Neilson; Zarko Alfirevic
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-11-30

Review 6.  Urine tests for Down's syndrome screening.

Authors:  S Kate Alldred; Boliang Guo; Yemisi Takwoingi; Mary Pennant; Susanna Wisniewski; Jonathan J Deeks; James P Neilson; Zarko Alfirevic
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-12-10
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.