Rustico MA, Benettoni A, D'Ottavio G, Maieron A, Fischer-Tamaro I, Conoscenti G, Meir Y, Montesano M, Cattaneo A, Mandruzzato G. Fetal heart screening in low-risk pregnancies.
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1995;
6:313-319. [PMID:
8590200 DOI:
10.1046/j.1469-0705.1995.06050313.x]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 80] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/22/2023]
Abstract
The aim of this study was to assess whether a screening program for fetal cardiac malformations is justified in a low-risk population, and which factors influence its accuracy. The fetal heart was evaluated in 7024 pregnant women at 20-22 weeks, and evaluation was repeated at a more advanced gestational age in 9% of cases. Cardiological follow-up was continued postnatally until 2 years of age. The overall prevalence of cardiac anomaly was 0.93%. The incidences of major and minor defects were 0.44% and 0.48%, respectively. There were 23 true positives (0.33%): in 20 cases, the diagnosis was made in the second trimester, and 13 women (65%) chose termination of pregnancy. Seventeen of the 20 cases identified in the second trimester were serious malformations. There were 42 false negatives (0.60%). Of these, 12 had signs of cardiac dysfunction at birth or within the 1st month of life, and three of them died as a result of their cardiac anomaly. There were eight false positives (0.11%), all of a minor type. Six abnormal karyotypes, out of a total of 21 performed in the true-positive group (28.5%), were found. In addition, five of the 42 newborns in the false-negative group had trisomy 21. The overall sensitivity was 35.4%, and 61.3% for major defects. The accuracy in two distinct periods was estimated because the level of experience of the operators was different: sensitivity was 45.2% in period 1 (1986-88) (77.8% for major defects) and 26.5% in period 2 (1989-92) (52.9% for major defects). We conclude that a fetal heart screening program in the obstetric population is justified. It defines a high-risk group for karyotyping, allows planning of delivery in a tertiary center or the choice of terminating the pregnancy for the parents and appears to have a positive cost-benefit ratio. A crucial factor is the level of training and experience of the operators, who need specific teaching support.
Collapse