Combining humerus and femur length for improved ultrasonographic identification of pregnancies at increased risk for trisomy 21

Ultrasound screening: Status of markers and efficacy of screening for structural abnormalities

Aneuploidy is a major cause of perinatal morbidity and mortality and can have a significant impact on expecting parents and their families. With early screening and diagnosis it is important to be able to educate parents regarding the potential impact of the diagnosis. This knowledge allows parents the opportunity to consider management options early in the pregnancy, permitting more time to mentally and emotionally prepare both for the course of the pregnancy, and after the birth of the child should the pregnancy continue. Prenatal screening provides pregnant women a non-invasive risk assessment for the most common aneuploidies. Those who are considered "high-risk" then have the option for additional diagnostic (invasive) testing. Prior to the 1980s, prenatal screening consisted of risk assessment through maternal age; however, with the advent of maternal serum biochemical analysis and ultrasound, the field of prenatal screening developed significantly. As biochemical and sonographic advances continued into the 1990s, the emphasis shifted to risk assessment in the first trimester, with the combination of maternal serum analytes and sonographic evaluation of the nuchal translucency.(1) Within the last decade, the introduction of non-invasive screening (NIPT/S) has shown great impact on the expansion and evolving practice of prenatal screening. Although in many places the standard for prenatal testing continues to include maternal serum analytes and sonographic evaluation, the role of each marker alone and in combination remains important. In the era of increasingly available screening tests, especially with NIPT/(NIPS), this article attempts to review the current role of ultrasound in prenatal care and elucidate the role of ultrasound markers in prenatal screening.

Methods for the joint meta-analysis of multiple tests

Existing methods for meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy focus primarily on a single index test. We propose models for the joint meta-analysis of studies comparing multiple index tests on the same participants in paired designs. These models respect the grouping of data by studies, account for the within-study correlation between the tests' true-positive rates (TPRs) and between their false-positive rates (FPRs) (induced because tests are applied to the same participants), and allow for between-study correlations between TPRs and FPRs (such as those induced by threshold effects). We estimate models in the Bayesian setting. We demonstrate using a meta-analysis of screening for Down syndrome with two tests: shortened humerus (arm bone), and shortened femur (thigh bone). Separate and joint meta-analyses yielded similar TPR and FPR estimates. For example, the summary TPR for a shortened humerus was 35.3% (95% credible interval (CrI): 26.9, 41.8%) versus 37.9% (27.7, 50.3%) with joint versus separate meta-analysis. Joint meta-analysis is more efficient when calculating comparative accuracy: the difference in the summary TPRs was 0.0% (-8.9, 9.5%; TPR higher for shortened humerus) with joint versus 2.6% (-14.7, 19.8%) with separate meta-analyses. Simulation and empirical analyses are needed to refine the role of the proposed methodology.

Literature Review and suggested protocol for managing ultrasound soft markers for Down syndrome: Thickened nuchal fold, echogenic bowel, shortened femur, shortened humerus, pyelectasis and absent or hypoplastic nasal bone

Mid-trimester soft markers have been linked with Down syndrome and other aneuploidies. There are many other prenatal screening tests available with better detection rates for Down syndrome than the mid-trimester ultrasound. Many patients confronted with the diagnosis of a soft marker become anxious and may request a diagnostic test (amniocentesis) despite the associated risk of miscarriage. This is also despite the fact that most fetuses with an isolated soft marker are chromosomally normal. The management of a pregnancy with a soft marker must therefore be planned in a manner designed to minimize patient anxiety. Likelihood ratios can be used to modify a patient's 'prior risk' (based on age or prior screening tests) and create a new risk. This calculation may help identify a subset of patients suitable for further investigation. It has been proposed that 'negative' likelihood ratios can be used to reduce a patient's risk if no soft marker is found at a mid-trimester ultrasound. There remain concerns about this approach and further research is required before this approach enters common practice. The published work surrounding the management of thickened nuchal fold, echogenic bowel, shortened femur, shortened humerus, pyelectasis (renal pelvis dilatation) and hypoplastic nasal bone is reviewed. Each soft marker has different associations and individual management plans for each of these soft markers are presented. Although isolated single umbilical artery is not usually considered a soft marker of aneuploidy, a management plan for this common finding is also included.

The role of the second trimester genetic sonogram in screening for fetal Down syndrome

The Genetic Sonogram is an ultrasound examination done on second trimester fetuses that not only evaluates the fetus for structural malformations, but also searches for the sonographic markers of fetal Down syndrome. The main markers that comprise the genetic sonogram include the nuchal fold, short femur and humerus, pyelectasis, hyperechoic bowel, echogenic intracardiac focus, and any major abnormality. The absence of any marker on a second trimester scan conveys a 60-80% reduction in prior risk of Down syndrome based on advanced maternal age or serum screen risk. The presence of sonographic markers, either singly or in combination, will raise the baseline risk of Down syndrome using likelihood ratios calculated for each individual marker. Using this approach, approximately 75% of fetuses with Down syndrome can be identified by modifying the patient's baseline risk according to the results of the ultrasound. The second trimester scan will likely continue to play an important role in the future in the detection of aneuploidy.

[Role of "subtle" ultrasonographic signs during antenatal screening for trisomy 21 during the second trimester of pregnancy: meta-analysis and CPDPN protocol of the Grenoble University Hospital]

OBJECTIVE

A meta-analysis about subtle ultrasonographic signs in second trimester of pregnancy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

196 articles dealing with the subject--from 1985 to July 2002--were studied. Data on the 11 reported signs were collected from 92 theoretically and/or statistically valid studies. Then, the studies were selected according to several criteria: isolated characteristic, defined thresholds, calculable sensitivity and specificity. After checking for homogeneity, a likelihood ratio was calculated for some of the signs.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis of the second trimester ultrasonographic signs of Down's syndrome enabled us to estimate the likelihood ratio (LHR) of six signs. At 22 weeks'gestation (WG) these signs are: pyelectasis equal to or greater than 5 mm; nuchal fold thickness equal to or greater than 6 mm; persistence of choroid plexus cysts; shortness of the femur and humerus below the tenth percentile; hyperechogenic bowe; and nasal bone length less than 2.5 mm.

CONCLUSION

These validated ultrasonographic signs are independent of nuchal translucency thickness at 12 WG and of maternal serum biochemistry. This allows to calculate a combinate risk for nuchal translucency, maternal serum biochemistry and second trimester ultrasonographic signs when they are validated.

Intra- and interobserver repeatability of femur length measurement in early pregnancy

OBJECTIVE

To assess the intra- and interobserver reproducibility of songographic measurement of fetal femur length between 10 and 16 weeks of gestation.

METHODS

Femur length was measured three times by the same trained observer in each fetus of 136 pregnant women. A second trained observer then repeated the measurements. The coefficient of variation, intraclass correlation coefficient and repeatability coefficient with 95% CIs were calculated for each observer and between the two observers.

RESULTS

The inter- and intraobserver repeatabilities of femur length were good. For interobserver correlation, the coefficient of variation was 4.6% (95% CI, 3.0-6.2), the intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.69-0.95) and the repeatability coefficient was 2.1 (95% CI, 1.8-2.7). For intraobserver correlation, the coefficient of variation was 4.2% (95% CI, 3.2-5.6), the intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.91 (95% CI, 0.75-0.97) and the repeatability coefficient was 3.23 (95% CI, 2.33-3.86) for Observer 2. Similar results were obtained for the other observer.

CONCLUSION

Transvaginal femur length measurement is technically feasible and easy to perform between 10 and 16 weeks of gestation. The high degree of intra- and interobserver repeatability indicates it to be a reproducible method.

Use of genetic sonography for adjusting the risk for fetal Down syndrome

Systematic evaluation of ultrasound findings known to be associated with trisomy 21, at an appropriate gestational age, has been referred to as a genetic sonogram. A number of high-risk centers performing genetic sonography have reported detection of ultrasound abnormalities in the majority of fetuses with fetal Down syndrome. However, nonspecific markers are more commonly observed than structural abnormalities, which are detected in less than 20% of cases in a nonselected population. Also, the actual sensitivity of a genetic sonogram will depend on various factors including the markers sought, gestational age, reasons for referral, and of course the quality of the ultrasound. Appropriate use of a genetic sonogram can help to modify the risk of fetal Down syndrome by decreasing the risk when the ultrasound is normal, or increasing the risk when specific ultrasound markers are detected. The postultrasound risk can be estimated by applying specific likelihood ratios, reflecting the strength of individual markers, with the a priori risk based on maternal age alone, or combined with biochemical markers when known. We review this approach of age-adjusted ultrasound risk assessment for fetal Down syndrome and illustrate how the risk can be estimated. Individual sonographic markers are also discussed.

Nuchal index: a gestational age independent ultrasound marker for the detection of Down syndrome

OBJECTIVES

To determine if the ultrasound marker Nuchal Index (NIx) is gestational age independent, and to determine its specificity and sensitivity for Down syndrome (DS) identification.

METHODS

Prospective cohort. A prospective database of fetal biometry and soft markers of aneuploidy was searched for fetuses with the following criteria: confirmed gestational age, at least two measurements of nuchal thickness and biparietal diameter, no major detectable fetal anomalies, and either normal karyotype or normal postnatal exam. Nuchal Index (NIx) was defined as 100x (mean nuchal thickness [mm])/(mean Biparietal Diameter [mm]). This cohort was divided into two groups according to the last digit of their hospital unit number. Initial analysis was carried out in the first group (analysis group), with the second group (normal) used to test the results. A prospective cohort of pre- and postnatally diagnosed DS fetuses with at least two measurements of nuchal thickness and biparietal diameter constituted the abnormal study group (abnormal) and was used to determine the sensitivity of the index. P value <0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Eight hundred and seventy-five fetuses constituted the control group with 455 in the analysis group and 420 in the normal group. In the analysis group, Pearson coefficient and ANOVA confirm that NIx was independent of gestational age between 14 + 0 and 22 + 6 weeks of gestation. For the analysis group, mean NIx was 7.72, (SD = 2.05) and a threshold value of 11.0 yielded a specificity of 94%. Fifty-two DS fetuses made up the abnormal group. Mean NIx in this group was 17.9 (SD = 13.9), which was highly significant (P < 0.00001) compared to the analysis group. Using an NIx threshold of 11.0, sensitivity for any DS was 61.5% (32/52) and specificity (normal group) was 96% (402/420) (False positive rate = 4%). If DS fetuses with effusions, hydrops, cystic hygromas or central nervous system (CNS) defects are excluded, the sensitivity for an NIx of 11.0 was 50.0% (20/40).

CONCLUSIONS

Nuchal Index (NIx) can be assumed to be constant between 14 + 0 and 22 + 6. Using a threshold of 11.0, the sensitivity for any Down syndrome (DS) fetus was 62% (32/52) with a specificity of 96% (False positive rate = 4%). Even when obvious fetal conditions that can cause an increase in NIx are excluded, the sensitivity remains acceptable at 50%. NIx appears to be a useful, gestational age independent ultrasound marker for Down syndrome.

Second trimester ultrasound screening for chromosomal abnormalities

The use of prenatal ultrasound has proven efficacious for the prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal abnormalities. The first sonographic sign of Down syndrome, the thickened nuchal fold, was first described in 1985. Since that time, multiple sonographically-identified markers have been described as associated with Down syndrome. The genetic sonogram, involving a detailed search for sonographic signs of aneuploidy, can be used to both identify fetuses at high risk for aneuploidy and, when normal, can be used to decrease the risk for aneuploidy for a pregnancy when no sonographic markers are identified. Combining the genetic sonogram with maternal serum screening may be the best method of assessing aneuploidy risk for women who desire such an assessment in the second trimester. Trisomy 18, Trisomy 13, and triploidy are typically associated with sonographically identified abnormalities and have a high prenatal detection rate. The use of the described sonographic signs in low-risk women requires further investigation, however, patients at increased risk for aneuploidy due to advanced maternal age or abnormal serum screening can benefit from a genetic sonogram screening for sonographic signs of aneuploidy to adjust their baseline risk of an affected fetus.

Sonographic markers of fetal aneuploidy

A variety of ultrasound findings can be identified in fetuses with fetal aneuploidy. Typical findings vary with both the chromosome abnormality and gestational age at time of the ultrasound examination. Increased NT is the primary marker during the first trimester, whereas a variety of markers may be seen during the second trimester. The presence of ultrasound markers increases the risk for fetal aneuploidy, whereas a normal ultrasound reduces the risk. Optimal risk assessment includes consideration of other risk factors including maternal age, family history, and biochemical markers. It is expected that combined risks, incorporating ultrasound findings and biochemistry, will be available in the near future. How first-trimester screening is integrated with second-trimester screening remains to be determined.

Second trimester markers of aneuploidy

The risks of aneuploidy associated with identification of a sonographic marker in the low risk population is controversial. Prior risk estimates have been derived usually from high risk populations. Screening programmes in the first trimester, second trimester and combined first and second trimester will undoubtedly alter the second trimester scan as a screening tool for aneuploidy. This chapter reviews the current sonographic markers and the difficulties in their application to the general population.

Femur length and trisomy 21: impact of gestational age on screening efficiency

OBJECTIVE

This study assesses two methods used to define relatively short femur in screening for trisomy 21 and examines changes in performance of screening with gestational age.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of data on menstrual age, femur length (FL) and biparietal diameter (BPD) in 49 trisomy 21 pregnancies and 6069 normal controls. Reference ranges were derived for BPD/FL versus menstrual age and for FL versus BPD. Two methods of defining short femur (BPD/FL and observed-to-expected FL ratio) were examined for false-positive rates and detection rates for trisomy 21 at different gestational ages.

RESULTS

In the control group the BPD/FL ratio and its standard deviation decreased with menstrual age. Trisomy 21 was associated with a significantly higher BPD/FL ratio (P < 0.001) and the deviation increased significantly with menstrual age (P < 0.05). Eleven percent of 28 fetuses examined at 15-17 weeks had a BPD/FL above the 95th centile compared with 24% of 21 fetuses examined at 18-20 weeks (P = 0.40). The median observed-to-expected FL ratio in the control group was 1.0 throughout the gestational age range but the standard deviation decreased significantly with menstrual age (P < 0.01). Trisomy 21 was associated with a significantly reduced observed-to-expected FL ratio (P < 0.001) and the deviation increased significantly with menstrual age (P < 0.05). A fixed cut-off of 0.91 for observed-to-expected FL ratio provided a false-positive rate of 12% at 15-17 weeks compared with 6% at 18-20 weeks of gestation (P < 0.001) with detection rates of 29 and 38%, respectively (P = 0.73).

CONCLUSION

Irrespective of the definition used to define the condition, relatively short femur is a poor marker for trisomy 21 particularly when the assessment takes place before 18 weeks of gestation.

Antenatal screening for Down's syndrome

BACKGROUND

In 1968 the first antenatal diagnosis of Down's syndrome was made and screening on the basis of selecting women of advanced maternal age for amniocentesis was gradually introduced into medical practice. In 1983 it was shown that low maternal serum alpha fetoprotein (AFP) was associated with Down's syndrome. Later, raised maternal serum human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG), and low unconjugated oestriol (uE3) were found to be markers of Down's syndrome. In 1988 the three biochemical markers were used together with maternal age as a method of screening, and this has been widely adopted. PRINCIPLES OF ANTENATAL SCREENING FOR DOWN'S SYNDROME: Methods of screening need to be fully evaluated before being introduced into routine clinical practice. This included choosing markers for which there is sufficient scientific evidence of efficacy, quantifying performance in terms of detection and false positive rates, and establishing methods of monitoring performance. Screening needs to be provided as an integrated service, coordinating and managing the separate aspects of the screening process. SERUM MARKERS AT 15-22 WEEKS OF PREGNANCY: A large number of serum markers have been found to be associated with Down's syndrome between 15 and 22 weeks of pregnancy. The principal markers are AFP, hCG or its individual subunits (free alpha- and free beta-hCG), uE3, and inhibin A. Screening performance varies according to the choice of markers used and whether ultrasound is used to estimate gestational age (table 1). When an ultrasound scan is used to estimate gestational age the detection rate for a 5% false positive rate is estimated to be 59% using the double test (AFP and hCG), 69% using the triple test (AFP, hCG, uE3), and 76% using the quadruple test (AFP, hCG, uE3, inhibin A), all in combination with maternal age. Other factors that can usefully be taken into account in screening are maternal weight, the presence of insulin dependent diabetes mellitus, multiple pregnancy, ethnic origin, previous Down's syndrome pregnancy, and whether the test is the first one in a pregnancy or a repeat. Factors such as parity and smoking are associated with one or more of the serum markers, but the effect is too small to justify adjusting for these factors in interpreting a screening test.

URINARY MARKERS AND FETAL CELLS IN MATERNAL BLOOD

Urinary beta-core hCG has been investigated in a number of studies and shown to be raised in pregnancies with Down's syndrome. This area is currently the subject of active research and the use of urine in future screening programmes may be a practical possibility. Other urinary markers, such as total oestriol and free beta-hCG may also be of value. Fetal cells can be identified in the maternal circulation and techniques such as fluorescent in situ hybridisation can be used to identify aneuploidies, including Down's syndrome and trisomy 18. This approach may, in the future, be of value in screening or diagnosis. Currently, the techniques available do not have the performance, simplicity, or economy needed to replace existing methods.

DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS

Demonstration projects are valuable in determining the feasibility of screening and in refining the practical application of screening. They are of less value in determining the performance of different screening methods. Several demonstration projects have been conducted using the triple and double tests. In general, the uptake of screening was about 80%. The screen positive rates were about 5-6%. About 80% of women with positive screening results had an invasive diagnostic test, and of those found to have a pregnancy with Down's syndrome, about 90% chose to have a termination of pregnancy. ULTRASOUND MARKERS AT 15-22 WEEKS OF PREGNANCY: There are a number of ultrasound markers of Down's syndrome at 15-22 weeks, including nuchal fold thickness, cardiac abnormalities, duodenal atresia, femur length, humerus length, pyelectasis, and hyperechogenic bowel. (ABSTRA

Screening for Down's syndrome

Down's syndrome (DS) is the commonest cause of severe mental retardation in children. It is the result of trisomy of chromosome 21 which is usually a random event though it is commoner in older mothers. DS can be diagnosed by chorionic villus sampling (CVS) and amniocentesis followed by karyotyping. Because of the risks associated with these invasive procedures, they can only be offered to a high-risk group. At one time the sole basis for identifying this increased risk was maternal age, but within the past ten years a series of biochemical and ultrasound abnormalities have been shown in DS pregnancies. The biochemical abnormalities include changes in the levels of most fetal and placental products in the maternal circulation. The best-known of these changes are the reduced levels of alphafetoprotein (AFP) and oestriol (E3) and increased levels of human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG). The mechanism underlying these biochemical phenomena is unknown. Screening programmes involving the measurement of hCG and AFP, with or without additional parameters such as E3, at 15-18 weeks of pregnancy can typically identify 60% or more of cases of DS with a screen-positive rate of 5%. The combined risk derived from the various biochemical parameters, together with maternal age, is calculated by one of a number of computer programmes which have been developed for this purpose. There has been considerable discussion as to the exact biochemical tests which should be used for DS screening. This had led to controversy as to whether measurement of E3 has a place, and whether or not measurement of the free beta-subunit of hCG should replace measurement of the intact molecule. A notable recent development is the suggestion that measurement of the urinary beta-core of the hCG could be a highly discriminatory marker. A number of factors can affect the results of biochemical screening for DS. These include maternal weight, gestational age, ethnic origin, smoking, and diabetes. In addition, abnormal levels of the biochemical products may be found in other chromosome abnormalities.