OBJECTIVE: Results obtained with commercial testing kits for immunoglobulin M Toxoplasma antibodies may be inaccurate or may be inaccurately interpreted, which may influence whether a woman decides to terminate the pregnancy. This study was undertaken to determine whether confirmatory testing at a reference laboratory and communication of the results and an expert interpretation to the patient's physician would affect the rate of induced abortions among pregnant women with positive results of testing for immunoglobulin M Toxoplasma antibodies in outside laboratories. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study of 811 consecutive pregnant women for whom the toxoplasma serologic profile was performed at a reference laboratory. Almost all the patients had been informed by their physicians that a result of a test for immunoglobulin M Toxoplasma antibodies performed in an outside laboratory was positive. Women were separated into those with a toxoplasma serologic profile result suggestive of a recently acquired infection (group 1) and those with a result suggestive of an infection acquired in the more distant past (group 2). Physician reports of induced abortions were used to determine rates of induced abortion in groups 1 and 2. RESULTS: Of the 811 women 321 (39.6%) were considered likely to have a recent infection (group 1) and 490 (60.4%) were considered likely to have a past infection (group 2). Physicians reported pregnancy outcomes for 433 (53.4%) of 811 women (65.1% and 45.7% in groups 1 and 2, respectively). Whereas 36 of 209 women in group 1 (17.2%) terminated the pregnancy, only 1 of 224 women in group 2 (0.4%) chose abortion (P <.001). CONCLUSION: Confirmatory serologic testing in a reference laboratory and communication of the results and their correct interpretation by an expert to the patient's physician decreased the rate of unnecessary abortions by approximately 50% among women for whom positive immunoglobulin M Toxoplasma test results had been reported by outside laboratories.
OBJECTIVE: Results obtained with commercial testing kits for immunoglobulin M Toxoplasma antibodies may be inaccurate or may be inaccurately interpreted, which may influence whether a woman decides to terminate the pregnancy. This study was undertaken to determine whether confirmatory testing at a reference laboratory and communication of the results and an expert interpretation to the patient's physician would affect the rate of induced abortions among pregnant women with positive results of testing for immunoglobulin M Toxoplasma antibodies in outside laboratories. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study of 811 consecutive pregnant women for whom the toxoplasma serologic profile was performed at a reference laboratory. Almost all the patients had been informed by their physicians that a result of a test for immunoglobulin M Toxoplasma antibodies performed in an outside laboratory was positive. Women were separated into those with a toxoplasma serologic profile result suggestive of a recently acquired infection (group 1) and those with a result suggestive of an infection acquired in the more distant past (group 2). Physician reports of induced abortions were used to determine rates of induced abortion in groups 1 and 2. RESULTS: Of the 811 women 321 (39.6%) were considered likely to have a recent infection (group 1) and 490 (60.4%) were considered likely to have a past infection (group 2). Physicians reported pregnancy outcomes for 433 (53.4%) of 811 women (65.1% and 45.7% in groups 1 and 2, respectively). Whereas 36 of 209 women in group 1 (17.2%) terminated the pregnancy, only 1 of 224 women in group 2 (0.4%) chose abortion (P <.001). CONCLUSION: Confirmatory serologic testing in a reference laboratory and communication of the results and their correct interpretation by an expert to the patient's physician decreased the rate of unnecessary abortions by approximately 50% among women for whom positive immunoglobulin M Toxoplasma test results had been reported by outside laboratories.
Authors: Jose G Montoya; Oliver Liesenfeld; Sandra Kinney; Cynthia Press; Jack S Remington Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2002-07 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Eskild Petersen; Maria Victoria Borobio; Edward Guy; Oliver Liesenfeld; Valeria Meroni; Anne Naessens; Emma Spranzi; Philippe Thulliez Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Jianchun Xiao; Raphael P Viscidi; Geetha Kannan; Mikhail V Pletnikov; Ye Li; Emily G Severance; Robert H Yolken; Laurence Delhaes Journal: Microbes Infect Date: 2012-11-07 Impact factor: 2.700