Journals / Okmeydanı Tıp Dergisi / 2016 / Cilt: 32 - Sayı: 3

Comparison of First and Second Trimester Prenatal Screening Results

Birinci ve İkinci Trimester Prenatal Tarama Test Sonuçlarının Karşılaştırılması

Pages
130–133
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Interpreting the tests independently will cause false positive results because of this we think that it is necessary to evaluate first and second trimester test results as entegrated.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Prenatal screening tests have been developed to detect fetal aneuploidies.
📊
Key Findings & Data:These tests and their combinations which are applied in first and second trimester and have different rates for detection of Down's syndrome.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Interpreting the tests independently will cause false positive results because of this we think that it is necessary to evaluate first and second trimester test results as entegrated.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: Prenatal screening tests have been developed to detect fetal aneuploidies. These tests and their combinations which are applied in first and second trimester and have different rates for detection of Down's syndrome. The aim of this study was to compare the results of first and second trimester screening tests which were conducted independently in the same pregnancies. Material and Methods: The files of 1136 pregnant women having first and second screening tests independently were examined retrospectively. Patient's ages, gestational weeks, first trimester CRL ve NT measurements were registered with their first and second trimester trisomy risk scores. Collected data were analysed with SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences). Results: Mean age of the pregnant women were calculated as 26.6±5.8. %0.7 (n:8) of first trimester tests and %6.8 (77) of second trimester tests were reported as having high risk for trisomy 21. When the first and second trimester screening results in the same pregnancies were compared in terms of trisomy 21 risk scores; case numbers in terms of equal, decreased and increased risk were calculated as 55 (4.8%), 468 (41.2%) ve 613 (54.4%), respectively. While 11% (n:125) of those having decreased and increased risk were above 35 years old, this rate was just %0.1 (n:1) in those having no difference. Conclusion: In our study, 76 of 1128 patients detected as having low risk (<1\250) for trisomy 21 at the first trimester were encountered as having high risk (>1\250) at the second trimester test. Interpreting the tests independently will cause false positive results because of this we think that it is necessary to evaluate first and second trimester test results as entegrated.

Özet

Amaç: Fetal anöploidileri saptamak için prenatal tarama testleri geliştirilmiştir. Birinci ve ikinci trimesterde uygulanan bu testler ve kombinasyonları Down sendromu için farklı saptama oranlarına sahiptir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, aynı gebelikte bağımsız olarak kullanılmış olan birinci ve ikinci trimester tarama test sonuçlarını karşılaştırmaktır.Gereç ve Yöntemler: Aynı gebelikte bağımsız olarak birinci ve ikinci trimester tarama testleri uygulanan toplam 1136 gebenin dosyaları retrospektif olarak incelendi. Hastaların yaşları, gestasyonel haftaları, birinci trimester CRL ve NT ölçümleri ile birinci ve ikinci trimester trizomi risk skorları kaydedildi. Toplanan veriler SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) programı ile analiz edildi. Bulgular: Gebelerin yaş ortalaması 26.6±5.8 olarak hesaplandı. Birinci trimester testlerin %0,7'sinde (n:8) ve ikinci trimester testlerin ise %6,8'inde (n:77) trizomi 21 için yüksek risk tespit edildi. Aynı gebelikteki trizomi 21 risk skorları açısından birinci trimester ve ikinci trimester sonuçları karşılaştırıldığında; riskin aynı kaldığı, azaldığı ve arttığı vaka sayıları sırasıyla 55 (4,8%), 468 (41,2%) ve 613 (54,4%) olarak hesaplandı. Riskin arttığı veya azaldığı vakaların 11% (n:125)'i 35 yaş üzerindeyken bu oran fark olmayanlarda sadece 0.1% (n:1) idi. Sonuç: Çalışmamızda birinci trimesterde trizomi 21 için düşük riske sahip ( 1\250) olduğu bulundu. Testleri bağımsız olarak yorumlamak yanlış pozitif sonuçlara sebep olacaktır. Bu sonuçlarla birinci ve ikinci trimester test sonuçlarının entegre olarak değerlendirilmesi gerektiğini düşünmekteyiz

🔖

Cite This Article

AYDIN, T., AKSOY, H., AKTÜRK, E., AKSOY, Ü., ÖZ, L. (2016). Comparison of First and Second Trimester Prenatal Screening Results. Okmeydanı Tıp Dergisi, Cilt: 32 - Sayı: 3, 130–133. https://ajindex.com/articles/291689

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Newberger DS. Down syndrome: Prenatal risk assess- ment and diagnosis. American Academy of Family Physicians 2000; 15;62(4):825-32.
  2. Wald NJ, Cuckle H. AFP and age screening for Down syndrome. American Journal of Medical Genetics 1988;31(1):197-209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.1320310127
  3. Canick JA, Lambert-Messerlian GM, Palomaki GE et al. First and second trimester evaluation of risk (FAS- TER) trial research consortium. Comparison of serum markers in first-trimester Down syndrome screening. Obstet Gynecol 2006;108(5):1192-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000241095.19638.f2
  4. Nicolaides KH, Spencer K, Avgidou K, et al. Multi cen- ter study of first trimester screening for trisomy 21 in 75 821 pregnancies: results and estimation of the po- tential impact of individual risk-orientated two-stage first-trimester screening. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2005;25:221-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.1860
  5. Wald NJ, Rodeck C, Hackshaw AK et al. First and se- cond trimester antenatal screening for Down's syndro- me: the results of the Serum, Urine and Ultrasound Screening Study (SURUSS). Jounal of Medical Scre- ening 2003;10(2):56-104. http://dx.doi.org/10.1258/096914103321824133 Wenstrom K. Evaluation of Down syndrome screening strategies. Semin Perinatol 2005;29:219-24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.semperi.2005.05.014
  6. Platt LD, Grene N, Johnson A et al. Sequential pathways of testing after first trimester screening for trisomy 21. First Trimester Maternal serum Biochemistry and Fe- tal Nuchal Tranlucency (BUN) Study Group. Obstet Gynecol 2004;104:661-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000139832.79658.b9
  7. Kaya H, Cerci SS, Komek H, Yayla M, Alp MN, Oral D. Bölgemiz gebelerinde triple test ile prenatal tarama sonuçlari ve sitogenetik değerlendirilmeleri. Perinato- loji Dergisi 2004;12(1):38-42.
  8. Atak PG, Arpaci A, Seydal G. Adiyaman iline ait ikili ve üçlü prenatal tarama testlerinin medyan değerlerinin belirlenmesi. Turk J Biochem 2014;39(2):231-7.
  9. Malone FD, Canick JA, Ball RH, Nyberg DA, Comstock CH, Bukowski R. First-and Second-Trimester Evaluation of Risk (FASTER) Research Consortium. First-trimester or second-trimester screening, or both, for Down'ssyndrome. N Engl J Med 2005;353(19):2001-11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa043693
  10. Benn P, Wright D, Cuckle H. Practical strategies in contingent sequential screening for Down syndrome. Prenat Diagn 2005;25:645-52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pd.1215
  11. Driscoll DA, Gross SJ. Professional practice and guide- lines commit