Experiences of receiving an increased chance of sex chromosome aneuploidy result from non-invasive prenatal testing in Australia: "A more complicated scenario than what I had ever realized".

Many non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) platforms screen for sex chromosome aneuploidy (SCA) and SCA analysis is generally included in Australia where NIPT is available as a self-funded test. Little is known about the experience of receiving an NIPT result indicating an increased chance of SCA. This study aimed to explore the experiences of people who received this result and their perspectives on the information, care, and support they received from healthcare practitioners (HCPs). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with people who received an NIPT result indicating an increased chance of SCA and continued their pregnancy. Most participants only had contact with a genetic counselor after receiving their result. Transcribed data were analyzed using rigorous thematic analysis to identify important patterns and themes. Participants (18 women, 2 male partners) described embarking on NIPT, primarily based on advice from their HCP and without much consideration. Consequently, participants expressed feeling unprepared for the unanticipated complexity of their NIPT result and were faced with making a time-sensitive decision about a condition they had not previously considered. While more pre-test information was desired, timely access to genetic counseling post-test assisted with adjustment to the result. These findings suggest that routinization of NIPT may be compromising informed decision-making, resulting in unpreparedness for an increased chance result. Given the increasing uptake and expanding scope of NIPT, resources should be dedicated to educating HCPs offering NIPT and ensuring timely access to genetic counseling post-result. With appropriate funding, genetics services may be able to play a central role in offering information and support to both people who undertake NIPT and their HCPs ordering the testing. Implementing a publicly funded screening program in Australia could assist with standardizing prenatal screening care pathways and consequently better access to appropriate resources.

Increased nuchal translucency after low-risk noninvasive prenatal testing: What should we tell prospective parents?

Three decades ago, the observation that first trimester fetuses with excess fluid accumulation at the back of the neck were more likely to be aneuploid, gave rise to a new era of prenatal screening. The nuchal translucency (NT) measurement in combination with serum biomarkers and maternal age, resulted in the first trimester combined screening (FTCS) program. The introduction of noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) over the past decade has introduced the option for parents to receive highly sensitive and specific screening information for common trisomy from as early as 10 weeks gestation, altering the traditional pathway FTCS pathway. The retention of the 11-13-week NT ultrasound remains important in the detection of structural anomalies; however, the optimal management of pregnancies with a low-risk NIPT result and an isolated increased NT measurement in an era of advanced genomic testing options is a new dilemma for clinicians. For parents, the prolonged period between the initial diagnosis in first trimester, and prognostic information at each successive stage of investigations up to 22-24 weeks, can be emotionally challenging. This article addresses the common questions from parents and clinicians as they navigate the uncertainty of having a fetus diagnosed with an increased NT after a low-risk NIPT result and presents suggested approaches to management.

Declining invasive prenatal diagnostic procedures: A comparison of tertiary hospital and national data from 2012 to 2015.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, the superior accuracy of maternal plasma cell-free DNA-based prenatal screening has resulted in >50% national decline in amniocenteses and chorionic villus sampling (CVS), creating new implications for specialist training. OBJECTIVE: To compare the annual figures on amniocenteses and CVS in a tertiary hospital with national population-based trends between 2012 and 2015. METHODS: Retrospective study examining the amniocentesis and CVS procedures performed in a tertiary hospital between 2012 and 2015. Numbers of procedures, indications for testing, type of test and diagnostic results were analysed. Trends in the annual numbers of procedures were compared to national population-based data from Medicare Benefits Schedule database. RESULTS: The annual numbers of diagnostic procedures in our tertiary centre fell from 267 to 215 over the study period, representing a 19.5% decline. This was significantly smaller than the corresponding national decline of 53.7% for the same period (P < 0.0001). In 2015, ultrasound abnormality (including nuchal translucency ≥ 3.5 mm) surpassed high-risk screening results as the most common indication for invasive testing. Thirty percent of procedures performed for an ultrasound abnormality occurred prior to 18 weeks gestation. CONCLUSION: Our tertiary centre experienced a relatively smaller decline in prenatal diagnostic procedures compared with national figures, largely due to an increase in testing for ultrasound abnormalities. Our results demonstrate the increasing contribution of first trimester ultrasound in the detection of fetal abnormalities in the cell-free DNA era and the continued viability of specialist training in invasive procedures.