Prenatal screening for toxoplasmosis

被引:31
作者
Bader, TJ
Macones, GA
Asch, DA
机构
[1] UNIV PENN,SCH MED,CTR CLIN EPIDEMIOL & BIOSTAT,PHILADELPHIA,PA 19104
[2] UNIV PENN,SCH MED,DIV GEN INTERNAL MED,PHILADELPHIA,PA 19104
[3] VET AFFAIRS MED CTR,PHILADELPHIA,PA
关键词
D O I
10.1016/S0029-7844(97)00291-3
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Objective: To evaluate the merits of screening for toxoplasmosis in all pregnant women. Methods: We used decision analysis to compare three strategies for the antepartum management of congenital toxoplasmosis: 1) no testing for congenital toxoplasmosis; 2) current practice, which is to perform targeted screening in cases of incidental abnormalities noted on ultrasound; and 3) universal serologic screening of pregnant women followed by amniocentesis to diagnose fetal infection in cases of maternal seroconversion. For each of the three strategies, we considered the two available treatment options: intrauterine antiparasitic treatment or pregnancy termination. Results: Universal screening reduced the total number of cases of congenital toxoplasmosis compared with no testing or targeted screening. However, compared with no testing, universal screening with medical treatment resulted in 18.5 additional pregnancy losses for each case of toxoplasmosis avoided. If infected pregnancies underwent Germination, universal screening resulted in 12.1 additional pregnancy losses for each case avoided. Conclusion: Maternal screening reduces the number of cases of disease, but at a substantial clinical cost. The rarity of the disease and limitations in diagnosis and therapy limit the effectiveness of screening strategies. The risks associated with amniocentesis are particularly important. Universal maternal screening for congenital toxoplasmosis should not be performed. ((C) 1997 by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists).
引用
收藏
页码:457 / 464
页数:8
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]   WHY SOME HEALTH POLICIES DONT MAKE SENSE AT THE BEDSIDE [J].
ASCH, DA ;
HERSHEY, JC .
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1995, 122 (11) :846-850
[2]   Genetic screening for reproductive planning: Methodological and conceptual issues in policy analysis [J].
Asch, DA ;
Hershey, JC ;
Pauly, MV ;
Patton, JP ;
Jedrziewski, MK ;
Mennuti, MT .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 1996, 86 (05) :684-690
[3]   PROCEDURE-RELATED FETAL LOSSES IN TRANSPLACENTAL VERSUS NONTRANSPLACENTAL GENETIC AMNIOCENTESIS [J].
BOMBARD, AT ;
POWERS, JF ;
CARTER, S ;
SCHWARTZ, A ;
NITOWSKY, HM .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1995, 172 (03) :868-872
[4]   RISK ASSESSMENT OF AMNIOCENTESIS BETWEEN 11 AND 15 WEEKS - COMPARISON TO LATER AMINOCENTESIS CONTROLS [J].
CRANDALL, BF ;
KULCH, P ;
TABSH, K .
PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS, 1994, 14 (10) :913-919
[5]  
DESMONTS G, 1984, ANN PEDIATR-PARIS, V31, P799
[6]   EVALUATION OF THE POSSIBILITIES FOR PREVENTING CONGENITAL TOXOPLASMOSIS [J].
FOULON, W ;
NAESSENS, A ;
DERDE, MP .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PERINATOLOGY, 1994, 11 (01) :57-62
[7]  
GHIDINI A, 1993, WESTERN J MED, V159, P366
[8]  
GIBBS RS, 1994, MATERNAL FETAL MED P, P639
[9]   TRANSPLACENTAL AMNIOCENTESIS - IS IT REALLY A HIGHER-RISK PROCEDURE [J].
GIORLANDINO, C ;
MOBILI, L ;
BILANCIONI, E ;
DALESSIO, P ;
CARCIOPPOLO, O ;
GENTILI, P ;
VIZZONE, A .
PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS, 1994, 14 (09) :803-806
[10]   REGULAR REVIEW - CONGENITAL TOXOPLASMOSIS [J].
HALL, SM .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1992, 305 (6848) :291-297