Nuchal translucency measurements for first-trimester screening: The 'Price' of inaccuracy

被引:62
作者
Evans, Mark I. [1 ]
Van Decruyes, Hilde [1 ]
Nicolaides, Kypros H. [1 ]
机构
[1] Fetal Med Fdn Amer, Mt Sinai Sch Med, Comprehens Genet, New York, NY 10021 USA
关键词
NT screening; ultrasound; quality assurance;
D O I
10.1159/000106342
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Objective: First- trimester aneuploidy screening is in transition from the phase of ` development' to that of ` diffusion.' As with all other technologies, there is risk of diminished performance until newer centers are well experienced. Typically, inexperienced sonographers under- measure nuchal translucency ( NT), and experience, training and continual monitoring of data are needed to ensure that measurements do not deviate. Here we assess the impact of systematic under-measurement on abnormality detection. Study Design: Actual NT measurements from 13,887 normal fetuses, 82 with trisomy 21 ( T21) and 61 with other abnormalities (OA) with birth outcome data were mathematically modified to show either a 25% or 0.5- mm decrease in measurement. The impact upon sensitivity and screen- positive rates were assessed. Results: Reducing the NT measurements of T21 and OA cases lowers the sensitivity from 81.7 and 70.5%, respectively, to 67.1 and 62.3% ( p<0.01). If normals are correspondingly lowered, then the screen- positive rates are reduced from 6.9 to 2.0 and 2.5%. To maintain the same screen- positive rates and sensitivity, the risk threshold would have to be increased from 1/ 300 to 1/ 556. Conclusion: Minor inaccuracies in NT measurements as small as 25% or 0.5 mm will have very significant negative impacts upon abnormality detection, reducing detection rates by 18% ( 81.7 to 67.1%). Just as it is completely accepted that laboratory measurements require standardization and quality assurance, NT measurements, because they are used in an algorithm, need to be treated with the same rigor. That way the published data from centers that have developed such screening can be applied by other operators at other sites when counseling their patients. Copyright (C) 2007 S. Karger AG, Basel.
引用
收藏
页码:401 / 404
页数:4
相关论文
共 20 条
[1]   Prospective first-trimester screening for trisomy 21 in 30,564 pregnancies [J].
Avgidou, K ;
Papageorghiou, A ;
Bindra, R ;
Spencer, K ;
Nicolaides, KH .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2005, 192 (06) :1761-1767
[2]  
BEWLEY S, 1995, BRIT J OBSTET GYNAEC, V102, P386, DOI 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1995.tb11290.x
[3]   Maternal serum biochemistry at 11-13+6 weeks in relation to the presence or absence of the fetal nasal bone on ultrasonography in chromosomally abnormal fetuses:: an updated analysis of integrated ultrasound and biochemical screening [J].
Cicero, S ;
Spencer, K ;
Avgidou, K ;
Faiola, S ;
Nicolaides, KH .
PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS, 2005, 25 (11) :977-983
[4]   Integrated ultrasound and biochemical screening for trisomy 21 using fetal nuchal translucency, absent fetal nasal bone, free β-hCG and PAPP-A at 11 to 14 weeks [J].
Cicero, S ;
Bindra, R ;
Rembouskos, G ;
Spencer, K ;
Nicolaides, KH .
PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS, 2003, 23 (04) :306-310
[5]   Absence of nasal bone in fetuses with trisomy 21 at 11-14 weeks of gestation: an observational study [J].
Cicero, S ;
Curcio, P ;
Papageorghiou, A ;
Sonek, J ;
Nicolaides, K .
LANCET, 2001, 358 (9294) :1665-1667
[6]  
Cohen A.B., 2004, Technology in American Health Care
[7]  
EVANS MI, IN PRESS AM J OBSTET
[8]  
EVANS MI, 2006, PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS G, P277
[9]   Screening for trisomy 21 by fetal tricuspid regurgitation, nuchal translucency and maternal serum free β-hCG and PAPP-A at 11+0 to 13+6 weeks [J].
Falcon, O ;
Auer, M ;
Gerovassili, A ;
Spencer, K ;
Nicolaides, KH .
ULTRASOUND IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2006, 27 (02) :151-155
[10]   Audit on nuchal translucency thickness measurements in Flanders, Belgium: a plea for methodological standardization [J].
Gyselaers, WJA ;
Vereecken, AJ ;
Van Herck, EJH ;
Straetmans, DPL ;
De Jonge, ETM ;
Ombelet, WUAM ;
Nijhuis, JG .
ULTRASOUND IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2004, 24 (05) :511-515