DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20200332

Sensitivity and specificity of prenatal screening methods for detection of risk of fetal chromosomal abnormalities

Sunil Kumar Juneja, Pooja Tandon, Anjali Sharma, Anshu Sharma

Abstract


Background: Babies born with chromosomal abnormalities pose a burden on the family as well as the society at large. Early detection and management of fetal chromosomal abnormalities has become an essential component of antenatal care. Hence pregnant women of all ages are offered screening methods for early detection of chromosomal abnormalities. We intended to study the sensitivity and specificity of prenatal screening methods for detection of risk of fetal chromosomal abnormalities.

Methods: A three-year retrospective study was conducted from January 2015 to December 2017 in 258 singleton pregnant mothers attending antenatal clinic and delivering at DMCH. The patients were screened for chromosomal abnormalities in the first trimester by NB NT scan along with dual marker and level II anomaly screen scan along with quadruple test in the second trimester. Based on the test results the patients were classified into high risk and low risk pregnant mothers. All the patients with abnormal quadruple test were subjected to amniocentesis for karyotyping. The results of the first trimester and second trimester screening methods were statistically analyzed using chi square test, sensitivity and specificity of the prenatal screening methods was calculated.

Results: The sensitivity and specificity of dual marker test for detection of chromosomal abnormality is 50% and 85.94% respectively and that of quadruple test sensitivity is 50%, specificity is 95.3%. The difference was highly significant in the favour of the quadruple marker with P-value of 0.0004.

Conclusions: While counseling the patients regarding possibility of having abnormal fetus, obstetrician should keep in mind the false negatives and false positives of prenatal screening and diagnostic methods.


Keywords


Fetal chromosomal abnormalities, First trimester screening, Second trimester screening, Sensitivity, Specificity

Full Text:

PDF

References


Anderson CL, Brown CEL. University of Texas Medical Branch, Austin, Texas - fetal chromosomal abnormalities: antenatal screening and diagnosis. Am Fam Physician. 2009;79(2):117-23.

Benn P, Chapman AR. Ethical and practical challenges in providing noninvasive prenatal testing for chromosome abnormalities: an update. Curr Opinion Obstet Gynecol. 2016;28(2):119-24.

Natoli JL, Ackerman DL, McDermott S, Edwards JG. Prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome: a systematic review of termination rates. Prenat Diagn. 2012;32:142-53.

Wapner R, Thom E, Simpson JL, Pergament E, Silver R, Filkins K, et al. First-trimester screening for trisomies 21 and 18. New Eng J Med. 2003;349(15):1405-13.

Nicolaides KH. Nuchal translucency and other first-trimester sonographic markers of chromosomal abnormalities. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191(1):45-67.

Malone FD, Berkowitz RL, Canick JA, D’Alton ME. First-trimester screening for aneuploidy: research or standard of care? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;182(3):490-6.

Spencer K, Souter V, Tul N, Snijders R, Nicolaides KH. A screening program for trisomy 21 at 10-14 weeks using fetal nuchal translucency, maternal serum free beta-human chorionic gonadotropin and pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1999;13(4):231-7.

Dugoff L, Hobbins JC, Malone FD, Porter TF, Luthy D, Comstock CH, et al.0 First-trimester maternal serum PAPP-A and free-beta subunit human chorionic gonadotropin concentrations and nuchal translucency are associated with obstetric complications: a population-based screening study (the FASTER Trial). Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191(4):1446-51.

Smith GC, Shah I, Crossley JA, Aitken DA, Pell JP, Nelson SM, et al. Pregnancy-associated plasma protein A and alpha-fetoprotein and prediction of adverse perinatal outcome. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107(1):161-6.

Wald NJ, Morris JK, Ibison J, Wu T, George LM. Screening in early pregnancy pre-eclampsia using Down Syndrome quadruple test markers. Prenat. Diagn. 2006;26(6):559-64.

Chaudhury K, Mukherjee K. Sensitivity and Specificity of a prenatal screening method using the combination of maternal age and fetal nuchal translucency thickness for fetal aneuploidy: a clinical study in Eastern India. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2016;5:148-53.

Nicolades KH. Turning the pyramid of prenatal care. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2011;29:183-96.

Sieroszewski P, Perenc M, Baś-Budecka. Ultrasound diagnostic schema for the determination of increased risk for chromosomal fetal aneuploidies in the first half of pregnancy. J Appl Genet. 2006;47(2):177-85.

Lao MR, Calhoun BC, Bracero LA, Wang Y, Seybold DJ, Broce M, et al. The ability of the quadruple test to predict adverse perinatal outcomes in a high-risk obstetric population. J Med Screen. 2009;16(2):55-9.

Akbari M, Mirmazloumi SH, Garshasbi M, Talari ZS, Sadeghi F. Specificity and Sensitivity of NIPT for Prenatal Screening of Down Syndrome in 100 Pregnant Women from Tonekabon, Iran. Med Clin Rev. 2018;4(1):3.

Shohat M, Akstein E, Davidov B, Barkai G, Legum C, David M. Amniocentesis rate and the detection of down syndrome and other chromosomal anomalies in Israel. Prenatal Diagnos. 1995;15(10):967-70.