Geetika Gupta1, Shagun Aggarwal, Shubha R Phadke. 1. Department of Medical Genetics, Sanjay Gandhi Post Graduate Institute of Medical Genetics, Raibarelly Road, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To study the outcome of the fetuses with intracardiac echogenic focus (ICEF). METHODS: All patients who were found to have one or more ICEF on sonographic (US) examination at our center from January 2007 through January 2009 were included in this retrospective study. ICEF was defined as a discrete area of echogenicity noted in the left or right ventricle, which was as bright as bone. Patients were followed up to know pregnancy outcome. RESULTS: Of 762 fetuses evaluated by US, 48 (6.3%) were found to have an ICEF. Thirty-one of these 48 fetuses had an isolated ICEF; 11 had associated major malformations, and the remaining 6 had no major US abnormalities but were found to have other soft markers. Invasive prenatal testing was done in 21 cases for risk factors other than ICEF and was found to be abnormal in two cases. Seven pregnancies were terminated due to associated major malformations. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of ICEF was 6.3%. Of 31 fetuses with an isolated ICEF, outcomes of 28 fetuses are known and all neonates were reported to be normal at birth. Thus we infer that the presence of an isolated ICEF has no adverse effect on outcome of the neonate.
BACKGROUND: To study the outcome of the fetuses with intracardiac echogenic focus (ICEF). METHODS: All patients who were found to have one or more ICEF on sonographic (US) examination at our center from January 2007 through January 2009 were included in this retrospective study. ICEF was defined as a discrete area of echogenicity noted in the left or right ventricle, which was as bright as bone. Patients were followed up to know pregnancy outcome. RESULTS: Of 762 fetuses evaluated by US, 48 (6.3%) were found to have an ICEF. Thirty-one of these 48 fetuses had an isolated ICEF; 11 had associated major malformations, and the remaining 6 had no major US abnormalities but were found to have other soft markers. Invasive prenatal testing was done in 21 cases for risk factors other than ICEF and was found to be abnormal in two cases. Seven pregnancies were terminated due to associated major malformations. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of ICEF was 6.3%. Of 31 fetuses with an isolated ICEF, outcomes of 28 fetuses are known and all neonates were reported to be normal at birth. Thus we infer that the presence of an isolated ICEF has no adverse effect on outcome of the neonate.