OBJECTIVES: Toxoplasma gondii is a parasite which may give rise to congenital infection. Screening pregnant women for antibodies against toxoplasmosis is being debated in many countries. The preventive impact of toxoplasmosis screening of pregnant women depends on the magnitude of disease caused by congenital toxoplasmosis (incidence x transmission rate to fetus x diseased proportion of infected children), on the one hand, and the preventable proportion of disease (sensitivity of the screening test x efficacy of the treatment x compliance), on the other. In this study the preventive impact of screening pregnant women for toxoplasmosis antibodies is assessed by letting the value for these variables change within reasonable limits. METHODS: To obtain information on these variables, relevant publications were reviewed in the Medline database from 1983 to February 1996 and the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Database. References in review articles on congenital toxoplasmosis were also studied. RESULTS: The literature review showed that no population based prospective studies of the natural history of toxoplasmosis infection during pregnancy, nor any randomised controlled trials of the efficacy of antiparasitic treatment, had been carried out. In the empirical studies which have been performed the values of most variables show considerable differences. According to these values, the estimates in this study of the impact of toxoplasmosis screening in pregnancy may range from 0 to 40 children in whom disease is preventable per 100,000 pregnant women susceptible to toxoplasmosis infection. CONCLUSION: Sufficient scientific evidence is not yet available to propose screening for toxoplasmosis in pregnant women, and efforts should be made to provide such knowledge. Also, the magnitude of the negative impact of screening, such as induced abortion of healthy fetuses, anxiety in women with false positive screening tests, and side effects of treatment, has not been sufficiently examined.
OBJECTIVES: Toxoplasma gondii is a parasite which may give rise to congenital infection. Screening pregnant women for antibodies against toxoplasmosis is being debated in many countries. The preventive impact of toxoplasmosis screening of pregnant women depends on the magnitude of disease caused by congenital toxoplasmosis (incidence x transmission rate to fetus x diseased proportion of infected children), on the one hand, and the preventable proportion of disease (sensitivity of the screening test x efficacy of the treatment x compliance), on the other. In this study the preventive impact of screening pregnant women for toxoplasmosis antibodies is assessed by letting the value for these variables change within reasonable limits. METHODS: To obtain information on these variables, relevant publications were reviewed in the Medline database from 1983 to February 1996 and the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Database. References in review articles on congenital toxoplasmosis were also studied. RESULTS: The literature review showed that no population based prospective studies of the natural history of toxoplasmosis infection during pregnancy, nor any randomised controlled trials of the efficacy of antiparasitic treatment, had been carried out. In the empirical studies which have been performed the values of most variables show considerable differences. According to these values, the estimates in this study of the impact of toxoplasmosis screening in pregnancy may range from 0 to 40 children in whom disease is preventable per 100,000 pregnant women susceptible to toxoplasmosis infection. CONCLUSION: Sufficient scientific evidence is not yet available to propose screening for toxoplasmosis in pregnant women, and efforts should be made to provide such knowledge. Also, the magnitude of the negative impact of screening, such as induced abortion of healthy fetuses, anxiety in women with false positive screening tests, and side effects of treatment, has not been sufficiently examined.
Authors: F Robert-Gangneux; M F Gavinet; T Ancelle; J Raymond; C Tourte-Schaefer; J Dupouy-Camet Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 1999-09 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: P Valentini; D Buonsenso; G Barone; D Serranti; R Calzedda; M Ceccarelli; D Speziale; R Ricci; L Masini Journal: J Perinatol Date: 2014-09-11 Impact factor: 2.521