Prenatal aneuploidy screening and its impact on stillbirth etiology evaluation.

IF 1.6 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Minerva obstetrics and gynecology Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-28 DOI:10.23736/S2724-606X.23.05418-0
Gianna L Wilkie, Uchechi Nna, Naomi Stuffers, Katherine Johnson
{"title":"Prenatal aneuploidy screening and its impact on stillbirth etiology evaluation.","authors":"Gianna L Wilkie, Uchechi Nna, Naomi Stuffers, Katherine Johnson","doi":"10.23736/S2724-606X.23.05418-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Stillbirth impacts 1% of all pregnancies in the USA with the underlying cause often remaining unknown. The objective of this study was to identify if prenatal aneuploidy screening impacted patient agreement to stillbirth evaluation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients with a singleton stillbirth after 20 weeks of gestation between October 2017 and December 2021. Demographics and stillbirth evaluation were collected for all patients. Multivariable logistic regression was performed adjusting for variables that were significant in univariate analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 81 persons experienced stillbirth during the study period. Approximately 59.3% of patients had prenatal aneuploidy screening: 39.5% integrated screening, 37.5% non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT), and 22.9% quad screen. Prenatal genetic screening did not significantly impact patient agreement to placental pathology, serum laboratory evaluation, or fetal autopsy. Patients with NIPT were less likely to have genetic testing sent at the time of stillbirth compared to those with another aneuploidy screening (aOR 0.27, 95% CI 0.07-0.99).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Prenatal aneuploidy screening was not associated with patient acceptance of stillbirth evaluation. However, patients with NIPT were less likely to pursue further genetic testing during stillbirth evaluation, so further education regarding the benefit of karyotype and microarray should be included in patient counseling.</p>","PeriodicalId":18572,"journal":{"name":"Minerva obstetrics and gynecology","volume":" ","pages":"279-283"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva obstetrics and gynecology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-606X.23.05418-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Stillbirth impacts 1% of all pregnancies in the USA with the underlying cause often remaining unknown. The objective of this study was to identify if prenatal aneuploidy screening impacted patient agreement to stillbirth evaluation.

Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients with a singleton stillbirth after 20 weeks of gestation between October 2017 and December 2021. Demographics and stillbirth evaluation were collected for all patients. Multivariable logistic regression was performed adjusting for variables that were significant in univariate analysis.

Results: A total of 81 persons experienced stillbirth during the study period. Approximately 59.3% of patients had prenatal aneuploidy screening: 39.5% integrated screening, 37.5% non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT), and 22.9% quad screen. Prenatal genetic screening did not significantly impact patient agreement to placental pathology, serum laboratory evaluation, or fetal autopsy. Patients with NIPT were less likely to have genetic testing sent at the time of stillbirth compared to those with another aneuploidy screening (aOR 0.27, 95% CI 0.07-0.99).

Conclusions: Prenatal aneuploidy screening was not associated with patient acceptance of stillbirth evaluation. However, patients with NIPT were less likely to pursue further genetic testing during stillbirth evaluation, so further education regarding the benefit of karyotype and microarray should be included in patient counseling.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
产前非整倍体筛查及其对死胎病因评估的影响。
背景:死产影响了美国1%的妊娠,其根本原因通常尚不清楚。本研究的目的是确定产前非整倍体筛查是否影响患者对死产评估的同意。方法:我们对2017年10月至2021年12月期间妊娠20周后发生单胎死产的患者进行了回顾性队列研究。收集所有患者的人口统计资料和死产评估。对单因素分析中显著的变量进行多变量逻辑回归调整。结果:在研究期间,共有81人经历了死产。约59.3%的患者进行了产前非整倍体筛查:39.5%的患者进行了综合筛查,37.5%的患者进行了无创产前检测(NIPT), 22.9%的患者进行了四次筛查。产前遗传筛查没有显著影响患者对胎盘病理、血清实验室评估或胎儿尸检的同意。与非整倍体筛查的患者相比,NIPT患者在死产时进行基因检测的可能性更小(aOR 0.27, 95% CI 0.07-0.99)。结论:产前非整倍体筛查与患者接受死产评估无关。然而,NIPT患者不太可能在死产评估中进行进一步的基因检测,因此,关于核型和微阵列的益处的进一步教育应包括在患者咨询中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Minerva obstetrics and gynecology
Minerva obstetrics and gynecology OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
191
期刊最新文献
Use of the Knutson's paste for the treatment of perineal wound dehiscence after vaginal delivery: a single-center clinical experience. Endometriosis and risk factors in pregnancy, labor and delivery: a case-control study. Recipients' age, fresh embryo and blastocyst-stage embryo transfer as favorable factors in a transnational oocyte donation program. The role of colposcopy in HPV vaccination era. The predictive role of uterocervical angle in labor outcomes: a narrative review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1