Comparison of indications and results of prenatal invasive diagnostic tests before and after the implementation of the use of cell-free fetal DNA: a tertiary referral center experience

A Low-Cost, High-Fidelity Simulator for Transabdominal Chorionic Villus Sampling

INTRODUCTION

Chorionic villus sampling (CVS) remains essential for first-trimester genetic diagnosis, yet clinical volume may be insufficient to train new clinicians in the technique. Available simulation models are expensive, require animal parts or specialized resins, and cannot be stored for repeated use.

METHODS

We present a model for trans-abdominal CVS (TA-CVS) which is constructed from readily available materials costing less than $10 and can be refrigerated and re-used to train maternal-fetal medicine fellows in CVS.

RESULTS

All three attending physicians performing TA-CVS at our institution described the model as an accurate visual and tactile simulation, prompting its integration into our fellowship curriculum. To date, two senior fellows have achieved competency on the simulator and begun to perform clinical CVS under supervision, one of whom is an author on this paper. Both fellows and attendings indicated that the simulator provided a valuable tool for repeated practice prior to clinical CVS. Simulators are now maintained on the unit and have been re-used for 3 months and dozens of simulated procedures each without any apparent qualitative degradation in performance.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

We describe a low-cost easily constructed, durable, high-fidelity simulator for TA-CVS.

Effect of maternal age on foetal chromosomal defects: an investigation based on non-invasive prenatal testing

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the value of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in the prenatal screening of foetal aneuploidy-associated diseases at different gestational ages.

METHODS

Briefly, cell-free foetal DNAs were extracted from plasma first, followed by DNA sequencing and bioinformatics analyses for chromosome aneuploidy (T21, T18, and T13), sex chromosome aneuploidy (SCA), and microdeletion/microduplication. Subsequently, the positive results were subject to karyotype analyses.

RESULTS

The pregnant women included in this study were divided into six groups, and the results, such as chromosome diagnoses, and clinical phenotypes, were collected for data analyses. According to the results of the data analysis, the positivity rates of foetal chromosomal abnormalities in pregnant women under 20, 20-24, 25-29, 30-34, 35-39, and >40 years old were 0%, 0.17%, 0.25%, 0.27%, 0.60%, and 1.66%, respectively. The positive predictive value (PPV) in the 20-24 years group was 41.67%, that in the 25-29 years group was 62.5%, that in the 30-34 years group was 66.67%, that in the 35-39 years group was 90.74%, and that in the >40 years group was 90.32%.

CONCLUSION

Overall, NIPT detection in elderly pregnant women has excellent clinical application value in reducing the incidence of either birth defects or abortion caused by invasive chromosome examination.

Association between chromosome abnormities and prenatal diagnosis indicators screening in the second trimester of pregnancy

This study aimed to explore the prenatal indicators in the second trimester of pregnancy and their association with chromosome abnormities (CA) to guide decisions toward invasive diagnostic procedures. Pregnant women who underwent prenatal screening and underwent amniocentesis in the second trimester in our Hospital between June 2017 and February 2019 were included in this retrospective cohort study. The reason for amniocentesis in prenatal screening and diagnoses was extracted from the charts. Finally, 3449 pregnant women were included. Of them, 181 were with CA confirmed by amniocentesis (i.e., the CA group), while 3268 were without CA (i.e., the non-CA group). Compared with the women in the non-CA group, those in the CA group were more likely to be older (30 [27,32] vs 29 [26,31], P < .001), had higher gestational weeks (20 [19,23] vs 19 [18,23], P = .008), an increased risk of advanced maternal age (AMA) (9.4% vs 2.2%, P < .001), had an increased risk of NIPT (IRN) (5.1% vs 1.9%, P < .001), had higher rates of a parental chromosome abnormality (PCA) (1.8% vs 0.9%, P = .002), and had increased risk of trisomy 21 (IRT21) (63.0% vs 45.3%, P < .001). AMA (OR = 4.22, 95% CI: 2.35-7.58, P < .001; AUC = 0.536), IRN (OR = 10.62, 95% CI: 6.66-16.94, P < .001; AUC = 0.589), PCA (OR = 4.77, 95% CI: 2.01-11.32, P < .001; AUC = 0.584), and IRT21 (OR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.47-0.89, P = .008; AUC = 0.515) were independently associated with CA. AMA, IRN, IRT21, and PCA during the second trimester were independently associated with CA, but their predictive values for CA were relatively low. Combining those indicators may improve the predictive value.

Biochemical Screening for Fetal Trisomy 21: Pathophysiology of Maternal Serum Markers and Involvement of the Placenta

It is now well established that maternal serum markers are often abnormal in fetal trisomy 21. Their determination is recommended for prenatal screening and pregnancy follow-up. However, mechanisms leading to abnormal maternal serum levels of such markers are still debated. Our objective was to help clinicians and scientists unravel the pathophysiology of these markers via a review of the main studies published in this field, both in vivo and in vitro, focusing on the six most widely used markers (hCG, its free subunit hCGβ, PAPP-A, AFP, uE3, and inhibin A) as well as cell-free feto-placental DNA. Analysis of the literature shows that mechanisms underlying each marker's regulation are multiple and not necessarily directly linked with the supernumerary chromosome 21. The crucial involvement of the placenta is also highlighted, which could be defective in one or several of its functions (turnover and apoptosis, endocrine production, and feto-maternal exchanges and transfer). These defects were neither constant nor specific for trisomy 21, and might be more or less pronounced, reflecting a high variability in placental immaturity and alteration. This explains why maternal serum markers can lack both specificity and sensitivity, and are thus restricted to screening.