Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T22:02:50.458Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 3 - Antenatal screening for fetal anomalies

from Section 1 - Genetics and antenatal screening

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 April 2016

By
Manju Nair  and
Bidyut Kumar
Edited by
Bidyut Kumar  and
Zarko Alfirevic
Bidyut Kumar
Affiliation:
Wrexham Maelor Hospital
Zarko Alfirevic
Affiliation:
University of Liverpool
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Fetal Medicine , pp. 32 - 52
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Wilson, JMG, Jungner, G. Principles and practice of screening for disease. Public Health Papers No. 34. Geneva: World Health Organization, 1968. http://whqlibdoc.who.int/php/WHO_PHP_34.pdf (accessed March 3, 2014).Google Scholar
Shepperd, S, Farndon, P, Grainge, V, et al. DISCERN – Genetics: quality criteria for information on genetic testing. Eur J Hum Genet 2006; 14: 1179–88.Google Scholar
Norem, CT, Schoen, EJ, Walton, DL, et al. Routine ultrasonography compared with maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein for neural tube defect screening. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 106(4): 747–52.Google Scholar
Benn, PA, Horne, D, Craffey, A, et al. Maternal serum screening for birth defects: results of a Connecticut regional programme. Connecticut Medicine 1996; 60(6): 323–7.Google Scholar
Nicolaides, KH, Snijders, RJM, Sebire, N. The 11–14 week Scan: The Diagnosis of Fetal Abnormalities. New York: Parthenon Publishing Group; 1999.Google Scholar
Kagan, KO, Avgidou, K, Molina, FS, et al. Relation between increased fetal nuchal translucency thickness and chromosomal defects. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 107(1): 6.Google Scholar
Snijders, RJ, Noble, P, Sebire, N, et al. UK multicentre project on assessment of risk of trisomy 21 by maternal age and fetal nuchal translucency thickness at 10–14 weeks of gestation. Fetal Medicine Foundation First Trimester Screening Group. Lancet 1998; 352(9125): 343–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wald, NJ, Rodeck, C, Hackshaw, AK, et al.; SURUSS Research Group. First and second trimester antenatal screening for Down’s syndrome: the results of the Serum, Urine and Ultrasound Screening Study (SURUSS). Health Technol Assess 2003; 7: 1–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malone, FD, Canick, JA, Ball, RH, et al. First-trimester or second-trimester screening, or both, for Down’s syndrome. N Engl J Med 2005; 353: 2001–11.Google Scholar
Sotiriadis, A, Papatheodorou, S, Eleftheriades, M, et al. Nuchal translucency and major congenital heart defects in fetuses with normal karyotype: a meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013; 42(4): 383.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alamillo, CM, Fiddler, M, Pergament, E. Increased nuchal translucency in the presence of normal chromosomes: what’s next? Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2012; 24(2): 102–8.Google Scholar
Hyett, J, Nicolaides, K. First trimester ultrasound screening with nuchal translucency. In: Evans, M, Johnson, MP, Yaron, Y, Drugan, A, eds. Prenatal Diagnosis, 1st edn. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2005; 289–309.Google Scholar
Bianchi, DW, Crombleholme, TM, D’Alton, ME. Second trimester screening for aneuploidy. In: Fetology: Diagnosis and Management of the Fetal Patient, 2nd edn. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2010; 18–26.Google Scholar
Moreno-Cid, M, Rubio-Lorente, A, Rodríguez, MJ, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of performance of second-trimester nasal bone assessment in detection of fetuses with Down syndrome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014; 43: 247–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kagan, KO, Valencia, C, Livanos, P, et al. Tricuspid regurgitation in screening for trisomies 21, 18 and 13 and Turner syndrome at 11+0 to 13+6 weeks of gestation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2009; 33: 18–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malone, FD, D’Alton, ME. First-Trimester Sonographic Screening for Down Syndrome. Obstetrics & Gynecology 2003; 102(5): 1066–79.Google ScholarPubMed
Wapner, RJ. First trimester screening: the BUN study. Semin Perinatol 2005; 29: 236–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
National Health Service UK National Screening Committee (UK NSC). Screening for Down’s syndrome: UK NSC Policy recommendations 2011–2014 Model of Best Practice. NHS Fetal Anomaly Screening Programme (FASP).Google Scholar
Newby, D, Aitken, DA, Crossley, JA, et al. Biochemical markers of trisomy 21 and the pathophysiology of Down’s syndrome pregnancies. Prenat Diagn 1997; 17(10): 941.Google Scholar
Speroff, L, Glass, R, Kase, N. Textbook of Clinical Gynaecologic Endocrinology and Infertility, 6th edn. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 1999; 275–339.Google Scholar
Palomaki, GE, Haddow, JE, Knight, GJ, et al. Risk-based prenatal screening for trisomy 18 using alpha-fetoprotein, unconjugated oestriol and human chorionic gonadotropin. Prenat Diagn 1995; 15(8): 713.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Devore, GR. Genetic sonography to assess the risk of aneuploidy combination of serum and ultrasound screening): the historical and clinical role of fetal echocardiography. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2010; 35: 509–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orzechowski, KM, Berghella, V. Isolated fetal pyelectasis and the risk of Down syndrome: a meta-analysis Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013; 42: 615–21.Google Scholar
Simon-Bouy, B, Satre, V, Ferec, C, et al. French Collaborative Group. Hyperechogenic fetal bowel: a large French collaborative study of 682 cases. Am J Med Genet A 2003; 121A(3): 209.Google Scholar
Scotet, V, Duguépéroux, I, Audrézet, MP, et al. Focus on cystic fibrosis and other disorders evidenced in fetuses with sonographic finding of echogenic bowel: 16-year report from Brittany, France. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010; 203(6): 592.e1–e6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Patel, Y, Boyd, PA, Chamberlain, P, et al. Follow-up of children with isolated fetal echogenic bowel with particular reference to bowel-related symptoms. Prenat Diagn 2004; 24(1): 35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nyberg, DA, Souter, VL, El-Bastawissi, A, et al. Isolated sonographic markers for detection of fetal Down’s syndrome in the second trimester of pregnancy. J Ultrasound Med 2001; 20: 1053–63.Google Scholar
National Collaborating Centre for Women’s and Children’s Health; commissioned by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Antenatal Care: Routine Care for the Healthy Pregnant Woman, 2nd edn. RCOG Press, March 2008.Google Scholar
Agathokleous, M, Chaveeva, P, Poon, LCY, et al. Meta-analysis of second-trimester markers for trisomy 21. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013; 41: 247–61.Google Scholar
Nicolaides, KH. Screening for chromosomal defects. Ultrasound Obstet Gynaecol 2003; 21; 313–21.Google Scholar
Kirwan, D and the National Health Service Fetal Anomaly Screening Programme (NHS FASP). 18+0 to 20+6 weeks Fetal Anomaly Scan National Standards and Guidance for England, January 2010.Google Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Genetics. Noninvasive prenatal testing for fetal aneuploidy. Committee Opinion No. 545, 2012; 120: 1532–4.Google Scholar
Benn, P, Cuckle, H, Pergament, E. Non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy: current status and future prospects. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013; 42: 15–33.Google Scholar
Chiu, RW, Akolekar, R, Zheng, YW. Non-invasive prenatal assessment of trisomy 21 by multiplexed maternal plasma DNA sequencing: large scale validity study. BMJ 2011; 342: c7401.Google Scholar
Boat, TF. Cystic fibrosis. In: Behrman RE, Kliegman RM, Jenson HB, eds. Nelson Textbook of Paediatrics. WB Saunders Company, 2000; 1315–27.Google Scholar
Smail, F. Antibiotic treatment for symptomatic bacteriuria, antibiotic vs no treatment for asymptomatic bacteriuria in pregnancy. CDSR 2002(3); 1–5.Google Scholar
Smail, F, Vazquez, JC. Antibiotics for asymptomatic bacteriuria in pregnancy. CDSR, 2007, Apr 18; (2): CD 000490.Google Scholar
van Doornum, GJJ, Buimer, M, Gobbers, E, et al. Evaluation of an expanded two ELISA approach for confirmation of reactive serum samples in an HIV-screening programme for pregnant women. J Med Virol 1998; 54: 285–90.Google Scholar
National Health Service UK National Screening Committee (UK NSC). The UK NSC recommendation on syphilis screening in pregnancy. http://www.screening.nhs.uk/syphilis (accessed February 12, 2014).Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×