Use of Genetic Testing after Abnormal Screening Ultrasound

A Descriptive Cohort Study

Alessandra J. Ainsworth, Michelle A. Holman, Elisabeth Codsi, Myra J Wick

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background/Aims: The study aimed to characterize the use of genetic testing after abnormal screening ultrasound. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of patients undergoing genetic testing after abnormal ultrasound. Genetic evaluation consisted of noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) or amniocentesis. Classification of ultrasound findings, type of genetic testing, and results were collected. Results: A total of 139 subjects underwent genetic evaluation after abnormal screening ultrasound. Screening via NIPS was pursued by 61 (44%) patients while 78 (56%) proceeded directly to amniocentesis. Patients electing for amniocentesis had more cardiac, neurologic, and gastrointestinal malformations while soft markers for aneuploidy prompted more NIPS screening. Results were negative in 85% of the NIPS group compared to 60% of the amniocentesis group. Only 8% of patients who underwent NIPS proceeded to diagnostic testing. Conclusion: Patients pursuing NIPS after abnormal ultrasound had more soft markers of aneuploidy. Patients pursuing diagnostic testing were more likely to have major structural malformations and more total abnormalities identified. Patients who proceeded directly to amniocentesis were more likely to have abnormal genetic testing.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalGynecologic and Obstetric Investigation
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Nov 20 2017

Fingerprint

Genetic Testing
Prenatal Diagnosis
Amniocentesis
Cohort Studies
Aneuploidy
Nervous System Malformations

Keywords

  • Aneuploidy
  • Genetics
  • Prenatal genetics
  • Ultrasound

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Reproductive Medicine
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Cite this

Use of Genetic Testing after Abnormal Screening Ultrasound : A Descriptive Cohort Study. / Ainsworth, Alessandra J.; Holman, Michelle A.; Codsi, Elisabeth; Wick, Myra J.

In: Gynecologic and Obstetric Investigation, 20.11.2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{4351bd6505ac4b57b53bfb86b621e513,
title = "Use of Genetic Testing after Abnormal Screening Ultrasound: A Descriptive Cohort Study",
abstract = "Background/Aims: The study aimed to characterize the use of genetic testing after abnormal screening ultrasound. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of patients undergoing genetic testing after abnormal ultrasound. Genetic evaluation consisted of noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) or amniocentesis. Classification of ultrasound findings, type of genetic testing, and results were collected. Results: A total of 139 subjects underwent genetic evaluation after abnormal screening ultrasound. Screening via NIPS was pursued by 61 (44{\%}) patients while 78 (56{\%}) proceeded directly to amniocentesis. Patients electing for amniocentesis had more cardiac, neurologic, and gastrointestinal malformations while soft markers for aneuploidy prompted more NIPS screening. Results were negative in 85{\%} of the NIPS group compared to 60{\%} of the amniocentesis group. Only 8{\%} of patients who underwent NIPS proceeded to diagnostic testing. Conclusion: Patients pursuing NIPS after abnormal ultrasound had more soft markers of aneuploidy. Patients pursuing diagnostic testing were more likely to have major structural malformations and more total abnormalities identified. Patients who proceeded directly to amniocentesis were more likely to have abnormal genetic testing.",
keywords = "Aneuploidy, Genetics, Prenatal genetics, Ultrasound",
author = "Ainsworth, {Alessandra J.} and Holman, {Michelle A.} and Elisabeth Codsi and Wick, {Myra J}",
year = "2017",
month = "11",
day = "20",
doi = "10.1159/000484242",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Gynecologic and Obstetric Investigation",
issn = "0378-7346",
publisher = "S. Karger AG",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Use of Genetic Testing after Abnormal Screening Ultrasound

T2 - A Descriptive Cohort Study

AU - Ainsworth, Alessandra J.

AU - Holman, Michelle A.

AU - Codsi, Elisabeth

AU - Wick, Myra J

PY - 2017/11/20

Y1 - 2017/11/20

N2 - Background/Aims: The study aimed to characterize the use of genetic testing after abnormal screening ultrasound. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of patients undergoing genetic testing after abnormal ultrasound. Genetic evaluation consisted of noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) or amniocentesis. Classification of ultrasound findings, type of genetic testing, and results were collected. Results: A total of 139 subjects underwent genetic evaluation after abnormal screening ultrasound. Screening via NIPS was pursued by 61 (44%) patients while 78 (56%) proceeded directly to amniocentesis. Patients electing for amniocentesis had more cardiac, neurologic, and gastrointestinal malformations while soft markers for aneuploidy prompted more NIPS screening. Results were negative in 85% of the NIPS group compared to 60% of the amniocentesis group. Only 8% of patients who underwent NIPS proceeded to diagnostic testing. Conclusion: Patients pursuing NIPS after abnormal ultrasound had more soft markers of aneuploidy. Patients pursuing diagnostic testing were more likely to have major structural malformations and more total abnormalities identified. Patients who proceeded directly to amniocentesis were more likely to have abnormal genetic testing.

AB - Background/Aims: The study aimed to characterize the use of genetic testing after abnormal screening ultrasound. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of patients undergoing genetic testing after abnormal ultrasound. Genetic evaluation consisted of noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) or amniocentesis. Classification of ultrasound findings, type of genetic testing, and results were collected. Results: A total of 139 subjects underwent genetic evaluation after abnormal screening ultrasound. Screening via NIPS was pursued by 61 (44%) patients while 78 (56%) proceeded directly to amniocentesis. Patients electing for amniocentesis had more cardiac, neurologic, and gastrointestinal malformations while soft markers for aneuploidy prompted more NIPS screening. Results were negative in 85% of the NIPS group compared to 60% of the amniocentesis group. Only 8% of patients who underwent NIPS proceeded to diagnostic testing. Conclusion: Patients pursuing NIPS after abnormal ultrasound had more soft markers of aneuploidy. Patients pursuing diagnostic testing were more likely to have major structural malformations and more total abnormalities identified. Patients who proceeded directly to amniocentesis were more likely to have abnormal genetic testing.

KW - Aneuploidy

KW - Genetics

KW - Prenatal genetics

KW - Ultrasound

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85034815823&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85034815823&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1159/000484242

DO - 10.1159/000484242

M3 - Article

JO - Gynecologic and Obstetric Investigation

JF - Gynecologic and Obstetric Investigation

SN - 0378-7346

ER -