Clinical article: screening for trisomy 13 using traditional combined screening versus an ultrasound-based protocol.

AIMS: To compare the screening capability of ultrasonography in detecting trisomy 13 (T13) using a multiparameter sonographic protocol (NT+) with a classical combined screening test (CST) protocol. METHODS: The project was a prospective, multicenter study based on a nonselected mixed-risk population of women referred for a first-trimester screening examination. Each subject was offered a choice between either the gold standard, traditional combined screening test (CSG arm) or the ultrasound-based screening protocol (USG arm). General and MA-based screening performances were checked. RESULTS: The study population comprised 20,887 pregnancies: 12,933 in the CSG arm, including 27 cases of T13, and 7954 in the USG arm, including 30 cases of T13. The DR for T13 was higher in the CSG arm than in the USG arm for all tested cutoff points: 1/50 (88.5 versus 63.3%, respectively), 1/100 (88.5 versus 70%, respectively) and 1/300 (92.3 versus 83.3%, respectively). Using the ROC curves for fixed FPRs of 3 and 5%, the T13 detection rate in our study reached 90 and 93%, respectively, in the USG arm and 92 and 96%, respectively, in the CSG arm. MA influenced the T13 screening performance in the USG arm and reduced the DR in patients <31 years. Such influence was not detected in the CSG arm. CONCLUSIONS: Classic CST was more effective in detecting T13 than the ultrasound-only approach. However, the recommended cutoff of 1/50 showed unsatisfactory results for both traditional CST and the multiparameter sonographic test we proposed.

Screening for trisomy 18 using traditional combined screening vs. ultrasound-based protocol in tertiary center environment.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the screening performances of combined screening test risk algorithm for trisomy 18 (T18) using various cutoffs with a multiparameter ultrasound-based method. To compare the general and maternal age (MA)-based screening performances for T18 by means of combined screening and an ultrasound-based method. METHODS: This was a prospective, multicenter study based on a mixed-risk non-selected population of women referred to referral centers for a first-trimester screening. Each subject was offered a choice between either a traditional combined screening (CSG arm) or an ultrasound-based screening (USG arm). General and MA-based screening performances were measured. RESULTS: The study population comprised 10 820 pregnancies as follows: 5132 in the CSG arm, including 28 cases of T18, and 5688 in the USG arm, including 29 cases of T18. In the CSG arm, the detection rate (DR) for T18 at a false-positive rate (FPR) of 3% was 86%, whereas the DR was 100% for the USG arm. MA influenced the T18 screening performance in the CSG arm and reduced the DR in MA ranges <26 years and 31-35 years. This influence was not observed in the USG arm. CONCLUSIONS: Only, a multiparameter ultrasound-based screening method may be considered an effective alternative to combined screening for T18 screening. The technique exhibits high and stable DRs irrespective of MA.