Search

Objectives: To estimate the association between low first-trimester maternal serum placental growth factor (PlGF) and pregnancy-associated plasma protein A (PAPP-A) and the risk of placenta-mediated complications., Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of PREDICTION study including nulliparous participants recruited at 11-14 weeks of pregnancy. First-trimester PlGF and PAPP-A were reported in multiples of the median (MoM) adjusted for maternal characteristics and gestational age. Participants were stratified into four groups based on absence/presence of low (<0.4 MoM) PlGF and PAPP-A values. A composite of adverse pregnancy outcomes (including preeclampsia, fetal growth restriction, fetal death, and placental abruption) with delivery before 34, before 37 weeks, and at or after 37 weeks was calculated., Results: Out of 7262 participants, 86 (1.2%) developed the composite outcome before 37 weeks, including 35 (0.4%) before 34 weeks. The combination of low PAPP-A and low PlGF was associated with the greatest risk of adverse outcomes before 37 weeks (21%) and before 34 weeks (12%) compared to low PlGF alone (7% and 3%), low PAPP-A alone (2% and 1%), or neither marker (1% and 0.4%, respectively, P < 0.001). Looking specifically at pre-term preeclampsia, the combination of low PAPP-A and low PlGF was also associated with a greater risk (12%) compared to low PlGF alone (6%), low PAPP-A alone (0.5%), or neither marker (0.7%, P < 0.001)., Conclusion: The combination of low PAPP-A and low PlGF is associated with a very high risk for adverse outcomes before 34 and 37 weeks. An isolated low PAPP-A should not be considered a risk factor for adverse pregnancy outcomes., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Introduction: Nuchal translucency prenatal ultrasound is widely used to screen for chromosomal abnormalities. An elevated nuchal translucency has been associated with adverse outcomes such as pregnancy loss; however, extant studies investigating these associations have had important limitations, including selection bias. This study aimed to investigate the association between nuchal translucency measurements and pregnancy outcome, specifically, a composite of pregnancy loss, termination, stillbirth, or neonatal death., Material and Methods: This was a population-based retrospective cohort study conducted with data from the prescribed perinatal registry in Ontario, Canada, Better Outcomes Registry & Network. All singleton pregnancies with an estimated date of delivery from September 1, 2016, to March 31, 2021, and multiple marker screening including a nuchal translucency were included. Pregnancies with measurements 2.0- < 2.5 mm, 2.5- < 3.0 mm, 3.0- < 3.5 mm, 3.5- < 5.0 mm, 5.0- < 6.5 mm, and ≥6.5 mm were compared to a reference group with measurements <2.0 mm. We used multivariable modified Poisson regression models with robust variance estimation to estimate associations between nuchal translucency measurement and pregnancy outcome, with adjustment for age at estimated date of delivery and gestational age at screening., Results: There were 414 268 singleton pregnancies included in the study. The risk of pregnancy loss, termination, stillbirth, or neonatal death increased with increasing levels of nuchal translucency measurements, with an adjusted risk ratio (aRR) of 11.9 (95% confidence interval (CI) 9.9, 14.3) in the group with measurements 3.5- < 5.0 mm. When pregnancies with diagnosed chromosomal abnormalities were excluded, this association remained strong, with an aRR of 6.4 (95% CI 4.8, 8.5). Among pregnancies with a live birth, those with a higher nuchal translucency measurement (>5.0 mm vs. <2.0 mm) were also at increased risk of adverse perinatal outcomes such as admission to the neonatal intensive care unit and APGAR score <7., Conclusions: In this population-based study using robust methods to reduce the risk of selection bias, we found that pregnancies with increased nuchal translucency measurements are less likely to result in a live birth, even with the exclusion of chromosomal abnormalities. Pregnancies with increased nuchal translucency measurements that resulted in a live birth may also be at increased risk of adverse perinatal outcomes., (© 2024 The Author(s). Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Nordic Federation of Societies of Obstetrics and Gynecology (NFOG).)

Objective: To review the available prenatal aneuploidy screening options and to provide updated clinical guidelines for reproductive care providers., Target Population: All pregnant persons receiving counselling and providing informed consent for prenatal screening., Benefits, Harms, and Costs: Implementation of the recommendations in this guideline should increase clinician competency to offer counselling for prenatal screening options and provide appropriate interventions. Given the variety of available options for prenatal screening with different performance, cost, and availability across Canada, appropriate counselling is of paramount importance to offer the best individual choice to Canadian pregnant persons. Prenatal screening may cause anxiety, and the decisions about prenatal diagnostic procedures are complex given the potential risk of fetal loss., Evidence: Published literature was retrieved through searches of Medline, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library in and prior to July 2023, using an appropriate controlled vocabulary (prenatal diagnosis, amniocentesis, chorionic villi sampling, non-invasive prenatal screening) and key words (prenatal screening, prenatal genetic counselling). Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized control trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies written in English and published from January 1995 to July 2023., Validation Methods: The authors rated the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. See online Appendix A (Tables A1 for definitions and A2 for interpretations)., Intended Audience: Health care providers involved in prenatal screening, including general practitioners, obstetricians, midwives, maternal-fetal medicine specialists, geneticists, and radiologists., Social Media Abstract: Non-invasive prenatal screening is the most accurate method for detecting major aneuploidies. It is not universally available in the public health system and has some limitations., Summary Statements: RECOMMENDATIONS., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Multiple marker screening is offered to pregnant individuals in many jurisdictions to screen for trisomies 21 and 18. On occasion, the result is 'double-positive'-a screening result that is unexpectedly positive for both aneuploidies. Although this occurs rarely, the paucity of available evidence about the outcomes of these pregnancies hinders patient counselling. This study aimed to investigate the association of double-positive results with preterm birth and other adverse perinatal outcomes., Methods: We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study of pregnancies with an estimated date of delivery from September 1, 2016, to March 31, 2021, using province-wide perinatal registry data in Ontario, Canada. Pregnancies with double-positive screening results where trisomies 21 and 18 were ruled-out were compared to pregnancies with screen negative results for both aneuploidies. We used modified Poisson regression models with robust variance estimation to examine the association of double positive results with preterm birth and secondary outcomes., Results: From 429 540 pregnancies with multiple marker screening, 863 (0.2%) had a double-positive result; trisomies 21 and 18 were ruled out in 374 pregnancies, 203 of which resulted in a live birth. Among the pregnancies in the double-positive group resulting in a live birth, the risk of preterm birth was increased compared to pregnancies with a screen negative result: adjusted risk ratio (aRR) 2.6 (95%CI 2.0-3.6), adjusted risk difference (aRD) 10.5% (95%CI 5.4-15.7). In a sensitivity analysis excluding all diagnosed chromosomal abnormalities, the risk of preterm birth remained elevated to a similar degree: aRR 2.6 (95%CI 1.9-3.7), aRD 10.0% (95%CI 4.8-15.3). The risk of other adverse perinatal outcomes was also higher, including the risk of chromosomal abnormalities other than trisomies 21 and 18: aRR 81.1 (95%CI 69.4-94.8), aRD 34.0% (95%CI 29.2-38.8). Pregnancies with double-positive results were also less likely to result in a live birth, even when excluding all diagnosed chromosomal abnormalities; and at increased risk of adverse perinatal outcomes for those resulting in a live birth., Conclusion: Although rare, double-positive multiple marker screening results are associated with an increased risk of preterm birth and other adverse perinatal outcomes, even when excluding all identified chromosomal abnormalities., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF) studies suggest that preterm preeclampsia can be predicted in the first trimester by combining biophysical, biochemical, and ultrasound markers and prevented using aspirin. We aimed to evaluate the FMF preterm preeclampsia screening test in nulliparous women., Methods: We conducted a prospective multicenter cohort study of nulliparous women recruited at 11 to 14 weeks. Maternal characteristics, mean arterial blood pressure, PAPP-A (pregnancy-associated plasma protein A), PlGF (placental growth factor) in maternal blood, and uterine artery pulsatility index were collected at recruitment. The risk of preterm preeclampsia was calculated by a third party blinded to pregnancy outcomes. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to estimate the detection rate (sensitivity) and the false-positive rate (1-specificity) for preterm (<37 weeks) and for early-onset (<34 weeks) preeclampsia according to the FMF screening test and according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists criteria., Results: We recruited 7554 participants including 7325 (97%) who remained eligible after 20 weeks of which 65 (0.9%) developed preterm preeclampsia, and 22 (0.3%) developed early-onset preeclampsia. Using the FMF algorithm (cutoff of ≥1 in 110 for preterm preeclampsia), the detection rate was 63.1% for preterm preeclampsia and 77.3% for early-onset preeclampsia at a false-positive rate of 15.8%. Using the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists criteria, the equivalent detection rates would have been 61.5% and 59.1%, respectively, for a false-positive rate of 34.3%., Conclusions: The first-trimester FMF preeclampsia screening test predicts two-thirds of preterm preeclampsia and three-quarters of early-onset preeclampsia in nulliparous women, with a false-positive rate of ≈16%., Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02189148., Competing Interests: Disclosures None.

Low- and middle-income countries are underresourced in subspecialist care. This study describes a unique maternal-fetal medicine clinical fellowship training program at Moi University School of Medicine and Moi Teaching and Referral Hospital in Eldoret, Western Kenya. The first of its kind in Eastern Africa, it has met with success in the retention of highly qualified practitioners providing complex pregnancy care to a population that has been heretofore underserved., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Decision-making in fetal cardiology is fraught with ethical issues yet education in bioethics for trainees is limited or nonexistent. In this innovation report, we describe the development of a fetal cardiology bioethics curriculum designed to address this gap. The curriculum was developed to supplement the core curriculum for cardiology fellows and fetal cardiology subspecialty trainees. The series combines didactic and interactive teaching modalities and contains 5 key components: (1) introduction to bioethics and its role in fetal cardiology, (2) counseling and pathways for compassionate terminal care, (3) case vignette-based ethical analysis and discussion cases, (4) fetal counseling considerations for shared decision-making and recommendations, (5) facilitated communications role play. The curriculum was refined using session evaluations from end users. This report describes the innovative curriculum as a starting point for further incorporation and study of bioethical education in pediatric cardiology and fetal training programs., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Importance: Ultrasonographic measurement of fetal nuchal translucency is used in prenatal screening for trisomies 21 and 18 and other conditions. A cutoff of 3.5 mm or greater is commonly used to offer follow-up investigations, such as prenatal cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening or cytogenetic testing. Recent studies showed a possible association with chromosomal anomalies for levels less than 3.5 mm, but extant evidence has limitations., Objective: To evaluate the association between different nuchal translucency measurements and cytogenetic outcomes on a population level., Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based retrospective cohort study used data from the Better Outcomes Registry & Network, the perinatal registry for Ontario, Canada. All singleton pregnancies with an estimated date of delivery from September 1, 2016, to March 31, 2021, were included. Data were analyzed from March 17 to August 14, 2023., Exposures: Nuchal translucency measurements were identified through multiple-marker screening results., Main Outcomes and Measures: Chromosomal anomalies were identified through all Ontario laboratory-generated prenatal and postnatal cytogenetic tests. Cytogenetic testing results, supplemented with information from cfDNA screening and clinical examination at birth, were used to identify pregnancies without chromosomal anomalies. Multivariable modified Poisson regression with robust variance estimation and adjustment for gestational age was used to compare cytogenetic outcomes for pregnancies with varying nuchal translucency measurement categories and a reference group with nuchal translucency less than 2.0 mm., Results: Of 414 268 pregnancies included in the study (mean [SD] maternal age at estimated delivery date, 31.5 [4.7] years), 359 807 (86.9%) had a nuchal translucency less than 2.0 mm; the prevalence of chromosomal anomalies in this group was 0.5%. An increased risk of chromosomal anomalies was associated with increasing nuchal translucency measurements, with an adjusted risk ratio (ARR) of 20.33 (95% CI, 17.58-23.52) and adjusted risk difference (ARD) of 9.94% (95% CI, 8.49%-11.39%) for pregnancies with measurements of 3.0 to less than 3.5 mm. The ARR was 4.97 (95% CI, 3.45-7.17) and the ARD was 1.40% (95% CI, 0.77%-2.04%) when restricted to chromosomal anomalies beyond the commonly screened aneuploidies (excluding trisomies 21, 18, and 13 and sex chromosome aneuploidies)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of 414 268 singleton pregnancies, those with nuchal translucency measurements less than 2.0 mm were at the lowest risk of chromosomal anomalies. Risk increased with increasing measurements, including measurements less than 3.5 mm and anomalies not routinely screened by many prenatal genetic screening programs.

Objectives: Early assessment of pregnant individuals for risk of preterm preeclampsia (PE) is possible at the 11-14 week ultrasound visit using a validated multiple marker algorithm, allowing timely use of preventative low-dose acetylsalicylic acid (LDA) in high-risk patients. With no established early screening program for preterm PE in Canada, our objectives were to assess the acceptability and operational impact of routine screening for preterm PE during the 11-14 week ultrasound visit, evaluate uptake and adherence to LDA when recommended, and assess screening performance., Methods: A prospective implementation study of preterm PE screening among pregnant patients at the ultrasound unit of a tertiary obstetric centre in Toronto, Canada., Results: A total of 1057 patients were screened, with an acceptance rate of 87.1%. First-trimester ultrasound appointment time increased by a median time of 7 minutes (Interquartile range 6-9). By 16 weeks gestation, 88.7% of high-risk patients had started LDA, with adherence of 88.7%‒94.6% from 16‒36 weeks. Satisfaction with counselling was ≥7/10 in more than 95% of patients. There were 7 cases of preterm PE (0.73%), 3 in the low-risk group (0.35%), and 4 in the high-risk group (4.1%). When accounting for LDA use, the treatment-adjusted detection rate was 78.6%., Conclusions: We demonstrate successful implementation of a validated, effective screening and prevention program for preterm PE as a first step in the implementation of a broader program adaptable for cultural, access/equity considerations, and marker availability., (Copyright © 2023 The Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada/La Société des obstétriciens et gynécologues du Canada. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)