OBJECTIVES: To establish precise incidence figures for trisomy 13 and trisomy 18 in the former Trent region, to identify current prenatal diagnostic practice, and to assess the potential impact of the introduction of recently devised prenatal diagnostic practices. METHODS: An audit of all cases of trisomy 13 and trisomy 18 ascertained through the records of the Trent Congenital Anomalies Register and the Trent Regional Cytogenetic Laboratories. RESULTS: Forty-four cases of trisomy 13 and 88 cases of trisomy 18 were ascertained. Advanced maternal age effects were observed. Of all cases, 64% were first detected through chromosomal analysis initiated because of abnormalities noted on fetal anomaly scanning in the second trimester, whereas only 3% of cases were detected through the serum-screening programme currently offered for Down syndrome. In 11% of cases, the diagnosis was first suspected after birth. Twelve percent of couples chose to continue pregnancy following chromosomal confirmation of a suspected diagnosis. CONCLUSION: The introduction of a highly sensitive prenatal diagnostic screening programme would have a major impact on the timing and proportions of all trisomy 13 and 18 cases diagnosed in pregnancy as gauged by current practice. It is important that health professionals involved in prenatal counselling be aware that, as with Down syndrome and anencephaly, around 12% of prospective parents of a child with trisomy 13 or 18 choose to continue rather than terminate the pregnancy. Copyright 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
OBJECTIVES: To establish precise incidence figures for trisomy 13 and trisomy 18 in the former Trent region, to identify current prenatal diagnostic practice, and to assess the potential impact of the introduction of recently devised prenatal diagnostic practices. METHODS: An audit of all cases of trisomy 13 and trisomy 18 ascertained through the records of the Trent Congenital Anomalies Register and the Trent Regional Cytogenetic Laboratories. RESULTS: Forty-four cases of trisomy 13 and 88 cases of trisomy 18 were ascertained. Advanced maternal age effects were observed. Of all cases, 64% were first detected through chromosomal analysis initiated because of abnormalities noted on fetal anomaly scanning in the second trimester, whereas only 3% of cases were detected through the serum-screening programme currently offered for Down syndrome. In 11% of cases, the diagnosis was first suspected after birth. Twelve percent of couples chose to continue pregnancy following chromosomal confirmation of a suspected diagnosis. CONCLUSION: The introduction of a highly sensitive prenatal diagnostic screening programme would have a major impact on the timing and proportions of all trisomy 13 and 18 cases diagnosed in pregnancy as gauged by current practice. It is important that health professionals involved in prenatal counselling be aware that, as with Down syndrome and anencephaly, around 12% of prospective parents of a child with trisomy 13 or 18 choose to continue rather than terminate the pregnancy. Copyright 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Authors: Andrew R Yates; Timothy M Hoffman; Edward Shepherd; Bethany Boettner; Kim L McBride Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2011-05-18 Impact factor: 2.537
Authors: Francesco Crea; Matthew Forman; Rachel Hulme; Robert W Old; Dan Ryan; Rosalyn Mazey; Michael D Risley Journal: Fetal Diagn Ther Date: 2017-02-08 Impact factor: 2.587
Authors: Vijay G Sankaran; Tobias F Menne; Danilo Šćepanović; Jo-Anne Vergilio; Peng Ji; Jinkuk Kim; Prathapan Thiru; Stuart H Orkin; Eric S Lander; Harvey F Lodish Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2011-01-04 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Robert E Meyer; Gang Liu; Suzanne M Gilboa; Mary K Ethen; Arthur S Aylsworth; Cynthia M Powell; Timothy J Flood; Cara T Mai; Ying Wang; Mark A Canfield Journal: Am J Med Genet A Date: 2015-12-10 Impact factor: 2.802
Authors: Diego Diaz; Renata H Benjamin; Maria Luisa Navarro Sanchez; Laura E Mitchell; Peter H Langlois; Mark A Canfield; Han Chen; Angela E Scheuerle; Christian P Schaaf; Daryl A Scott; Hope Northrup; Joseph W Ray; Scott D McLean; Michael D Swartz; Katherine L Ludorf; Philip J Lupo; A J Agopian Journal: Am J Med Genet A Date: 2021-03-22 Impact factor: 2.578
Authors: Antonin Bukovsky; Michael R Caudle; Marta Svetlikova; Nirmala B Upadhyaya Journal: Reprod Biol Endocrinol Date: 2004-04-28 Impact factor: 5.211
Authors: Megan P Hall; Matthew Hill; Bernhard Zimmermann; Styrmir Sigurjonsson; Margaret Westemeyer; Jennifer Saucier; Zachary Demko; Matthew Rabinowitz Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-05-07 Impact factor: 3.240