Dick P T
University of Toronto, Ont.
CMAJ. 1996 Feb 15;154(4):465-79.
To make recommendations to physicians providing prenatal care on (1) whether prenatal screening for and diagnosis of Down syndrome (DS) is advisable and (2) alternative screening and diagnosis manoeuvres.
"Triple-marker" screening of maternal serum levels of alpha-fetoprotein, human chorionic gonadotropin and unconjugated estriol; fetal ultrasonographic examination; amniocentesis; and chorionic villus sampling (CVS).
Accuracy of detection of DS in fetuses, and risks to the mother, including psychologic distress, and to the fetus from the screening and diagnostic interventions.
A MEDLINE search for relevant articles published from Jan. 1, 1966, to Mar. 31, 1994, with the use of MeSH terms "Down syndrome," "prenatal diagnosis," "screening," "prevention," "amniocentesis," "chorionic villus sampling," "ultrasonography," "anxiety," "depression" and "psychological stress" and a manual search of bibliographies, recent issues of key journals and Current Contents.
The evidence-based methods and values of the Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination were used. A high value was placed on providing pregnant women with the opportunity to determine whether they are carrying a fetus with DS and to make choices concerning the termination of the pregnancy. The economic issues involved are complex and were not considered.
BENEFITS, HARMS AND COSTS: Triple-marker screening identifies an estimated 58% of fetuses with DS, but it has an estimated rate of true-positive results of 0.1% and of false-positive results of 3.7% (given a risk cut-off of one chance in 190 of DS). These rates vary with maternal age and the risk cut-off chosen. Women with a known risk of having a fetus with DS (e.g., those who have had a previous child with DS) may benefit from a reduction in anxiety after confirmation that their fetus does not have DS. Screening allows women at low risk of having a child with DS to detect fetuses with the syndrome, but may cause psychologic distress if there is a false-positive screening test result. Up to 20% of women with positive results of screening tests may decline to undergo a subsequent amniocentesis. Amniocentesis and CVS are very accurate in diagnosing DS in fetuses and have a very low rate of serious complications for the mother. Amniocentesis is associated with a 1.7% rate of fetal loss when it is performed after 16 weeks' gestation, whereas the rate among controls is 0.7% (for a difference of 1%, 95% confidence interval 0.3% to 1.5%). CVS entails a greater risk of fetal loss than amniocentesis (odds ratio 1.32, 95% confidence interval 1.11 to 1.57). There is little evidence from controlled trials of significant associations between amniocentesis or CVS and neonatal morbidity or malformations; however, samples have been too small to show differences in rare outcomes. Results from some case-control studies suggest that CVS increases the risk of transverse limb deficiency. Costs were not considered because they are beyond the scope of this review.
There is fair evidence to offer triple-marker screening through a comprehensive program to pregnant women under 35 years of age (grade B recommendation). Women given detailed information about serum-marker screening show more satisfaction with the screening than those not given this information. There is fair evidence to offer amniocentesis or CVS to pregnant women 35 years of age and older and to women with a history of a fetus with DS or of a chromosome 21 anomaly (grade B recommendation). Information on the limitations and advantages of each procedure should be offered. Triple-marker screening may be offered as an alternative to CVS or amniocentesis to pregnant women over 35.
Recommendations concerning prenatal diagnosis are similar to those of the US Preventive Services Task Force, the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada, the Canadian College of Medical Geneticists and the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group. No previous specific recommendations concerning triple-maker screening exist.
These guidelines were developed and endorsed by the Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination, which is funded by Health Canada and the National Health Research and Development Program.
就以下方面向提供产前护理的医生提出建议:(1)对唐氏综合征(DS)进行产前筛查和诊断是否可取;(2)替代筛查和诊断方法。
对孕妇血清中甲胎蛋白、人绒毛膜促性腺激素和未结合雌三醇水平进行“三联筛查”;胎儿超声检查;羊膜穿刺术;绒毛取样(CVS)。
胎儿DS检测的准确性,以及筛查和诊断干预措施对母亲(包括心理困扰)和胎儿的风险。
通过医学主题词“唐氏综合征”“产前诊断”“筛查”“预防”“羊膜穿刺术”“绒毛取样”“超声检查”“焦虑”“抑郁”和“心理压力”,对1966年1月1日至1994年3月31日发表的相关文章进行医学期刊数据库检索,并对手工检索的参考文献、近期主要期刊和《现刊目次》进行检索。
采用加拿大定期健康检查特别工作组基于证据的方法和价值观。高度重视为孕妇提供机会,以确定其胎儿是否患有DS,并就终止妊娠做出选择。所涉及的经济问题很复杂,未予考虑。
益处、危害和成本:三联筛查可识别约58%的DS胎儿,但其真阳性率估计为0.1%,假阳性率估计为3.7%(DS风险截断值为1/190时)。这些比率随孕妇年龄和所选风险截断值而变化。已知有胎儿患DS风险的女性(如曾有过患DS孩子的女性),在确认其胎儿未患DS后,焦虑感可能会减轻。筛查可使患DS风险低的女性检测出患有该综合征的胎儿,但如果筛查试验结果为假阳性,可能会导致心理困扰。高达20%筛查试验结果为阳性的女性可能会拒绝接受后续的羊膜穿刺术。羊膜穿刺术和CVS在诊断胎儿DS方面非常准确,对母亲的严重并发症发生率很低。妊娠16周后进行羊膜穿刺术,胎儿丢失率为1.7%,而对照组为0.7%(差值为1%,95%置信区间为0.3%至1.5%)。CVS导致胎儿丢失的风险比羊膜穿刺术更大(优势比为1.32,95%置信区间为1.11至1.57)。对照试验几乎没有证据表明羊膜穿刺术或CVS与新生儿发病率或畸形之间存在显著关联;然而,样本量太小,无法显示罕见结局的差异。一些病例对照研究结果表明,CVS会增加肢体横断缺陷的风险。未考虑成本,因为这超出了本综述的范围。
有合理证据支持通过综合项目为35岁以下孕妇提供三联筛查(B级推荐)。与未获得血清标志物筛查详细信息的孕妇相比,获得该信息的孕妇对筛查更满意。有合理证据支持为35岁及以上孕妇以及有胎儿患DS或21号染色体异常病史的孕妇提供羊膜穿刺术或CVS(B级推荐)。应提供每种检查方法的局限性和优势方面的信息。可向35岁以上孕妇提供三联筛查,作为CVS或羊膜穿刺术的替代方法。
关于产前诊断的建议与美国预防服务特别工作组、加拿大妇产科学会、加拿大医学遗传学家学会和Cochrane妊娠与分娩组的建议相似。以前没有关于三联筛查的具体建议。
这些指南由加拿大定期健康检查特别工作组制定并认可,该工作组由加拿大卫生部和国家卫生研究与发展计划资助。