Ultrasound in prenatal diagnosis: polemics around routine ultrasound screening for second trimester fetal malformations

Prenatal Diagnosis - Tập 22 Số 4 - Trang 285-295 - 2002
Salvator Levi1
1Ultrasound Laboratory, Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Brugmann, Brussels, Belgium

Tóm tắt

Abstract

Ultrasound for routine fetal malformation screening has been polemical from its early beginning because of the very broad range of diagnosis rates disclosed, i.e. from 13% to 82%, average 27.5%. A review of available studies is proposed to assess objectively the efficacy of ultrasound, considering also economical, ethical and methodological aspects as influential factors for choosing a routine screening policy. The utility of fetal malformation diagnosis before birth is brought forward, including second opinion, karyotyping, poly‐disciplinary case discussion prior to management. Method and material of reviewed studies considerably vary and might influence the sensitivity results, as the choice of the population sample and selection of pregnant women, gestation age at screening, distribution of malformation among systems or tracts, exclusion of some fetal malformation and the routine practice of autopsy. Efficiency of screening studies is compared, and among them Radius and Eurofetus studies. Average sensitivity is finally considered as satisfactory in the daily practice when operated by trained personnel. The importance of additional factors for successful screening are emphasized such as education, equipment quality and fetal ultrasound examination at different gestation age for a better understanding of natural history of fetal morphology. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Abramowicz MJ, 1998, Textbook of Perinatal Medicine, 610

10.1046/j.1469-0705.1991.01030186.x

AIUM Bioeffects Committee. RADIUS Study, 1994, AIUM Reporter, 10, 2

10.2214/ajr.165.4.7676997

Ashe RG, 1996, Evaluation of routine ultrasound in the prenatal diagnosis of structural anomalies of the fetus, Ir Med J, 89, 180

10.1002/pd.1970151204

10.1148/radiology.171.1.2648467

Behrens O, 1999, Efficacy of ultrasonography screening in pregnancy, Zentrabl Gynakol, 121, 228

BenzieRJ SimpsonNAB.1996. Platypus CD‐ROM. Toi Kinnoir Inc.www.comnet.ca/‐tki.

BertrandF.1985.Personal Communication I from the European Registers of Congenital Abnormalities and Twins (EUROCAT) – Hainaut Part 1 1980–84.

10.1016/S0140-6736(98)03202-4

10.1046/j.1469-0705.1995.05010009.x

10.1159/000263623

10.1136/bmj.307.6895.13

10.1111/j.1749-6632.1998.tb08938.x

Campbell S, 1983, The prenatal diagnosis of fetal structural anomalies by ultrasound, Clin Obstet Gynecol, 10, 475

10.1093/oxfordjournals.bmb.a071843

10.1016/S0140-6736(72)92273-8

10.1046/j.1469-0705.1995.05030174.x

10.1046/j.1469-0705.1995.05030168.x

Chervenak FA, 1990, An ethically justified, clinically comprehensive management strategy for third trimester pregnancies complicated by fetal anomalies, Obstet Gynecol, 75, 311

10.1111/j.1749-6632.1998.tb08939.x

Chervenak FA, 1998, Textbook of Perinatal Medicine, 181

10.1136/bmj.303.6811.1165

10.1002/pd.1970111205

10.1016/S0002-9378(94)70040-0

DeutchmanM LoquetP.1999.Diagnostic Ultrasound of Fetal Anomalies. CD‐ROM. Silverplatter Education Inc.php.silverplatter.com.

DeVore GR, 1994, The Routine Antenatal Diagnostic Imaging with Ultrasound Study (RADIUS): another perspective, Obstet Gynecol, 84, 611

DeVoreGR.1998.Fetal Echocardiography(Gold Edition). CD‐ROM.www.fetalecho.com.

10.1259/0007-1285-34-405-539

10.1046/j.1469-0705.1997.10060375.x

10.1111/j.1471-0528.1998.tb09350.x

Eik‐NesSH BlassHG KiserudT TegnanderE JohansenOH IsaksenC.1992.Detection of fetal development disorders in a nonselected population. Paper presented at the 2nd World Congress of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology Bonn Germany 1992.

10.1034/j.1600-0412.1999.780205.x

EUROCAT Working Group, 1995, 15 Years of Surveillance of Congenital Anomalies in Europe, 1980–1994, Report 7

GillerotT.1995.European Registers of Congenital Abnormalities and Twins (EUROCAT): registre Hainaut‐Namur 1991–95 Loverval Belgium.

Goncalves LF, 1993, A critical appraisal of the RADIUS study, The Fetus, 3, 17

10.1016/S0029-7844(98)00132-X

10.1111/j.1749-6632.1998.tb08932.x

10.1016/S0002-9378(99)70577-6

Hajdu J, 1999, Congenital heart abnormalities and cardiac dysfunction: how prenatal diagnosis changed the chances for survival, Orv Hetil, 140, 815

Hegge FN, 1998, Sonography at the time of genetic amniocentesis to screen for fetal malformations, Obstet Gynecol, 71, 522

10.1016/0002-9378(85)90421-1

10.1016/S0002-9378(16)33043-5

10.1136/bmj.318.7176.81

10.1007/s004310050865

10.1136/fn.80.2.F135

10.1111/j.1471-0528.1984.tb05898.x

10.3349/ymj.1998.39.4.372

10.1046/j.1469-0705.1996.07050309.x

10.1016/S0301-5629(96)00196-2

10.1111/j.1749-6632.1998.tb08929.x

Levi S, 1998, Textbook of Perinatal Medicine, 587

10.7863/jum.1992.11.5.188

10.1111/j.1749-6632.1998.tb08931.x

10.1046/j.1469-0705.1991.01020102.x

10.1046/j.1469-0705.1995.05060366.x

10.1177/0272989X8800800107

10.1136/bmj.304.6840.1474

10.1016/0028-2243(89)90055-5

10.1136/bmj.4.5727.92

Macquart‐Moulin G, 1989, Sensibilité de l'échographic obstétrical dans le diagnostic anténatal des anomalies foetales majeures, Rev Epid Sante Publ, 37, 197

10.1016/S0140-6736(86)91610-7

10.1046/j.1469-0705.1995.06050320.x

10.1046/j.1469-0705.1998.12020103.x

10.1136/bmj.307.6907.793

10.1111/j.1749-6632.1998.tb08936.x

10.1046/j.1469-0705.1993.03050303.x

10.1097/00006250-198906000-00008

10.1046/j.1469-0705.1995.06050313.x

10.1016/S0002-9378(85)80070-3

10.1259/0007-1285-65-775-564

10.1016/S0002-9378(96)70019-4

10.1002/(SICI)1520-6661(199903/04)8:2<64::AID-MFM7>3.0.CO;2-D

10.1002/pd.1970120405

10.1002/pd.1970150902

Sunden B, 1964, On the diagnostic value of ultrasound in obstetrics and gynecology, Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 6

10.1046/j.1469-0705.1995.05030161.x

Thiagarajah S, 1990, Early diagnosis of spina bifida – the value of cranial ultrasound markers, Obstet Gynecol, 76, 54

10.1016/0002-9378(90)90378-K

10.1111/j.1749-6632.1998.tb08935.x

Waitzman NJ, 1994, Estimates of the economic costs of birth defects, Inquiry, 31, 188