Search

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.)

Maternal infections with PVB19, HCV, CMV, and HIV during the antepartum period are important health problems for which the technological capacities for screening and diagnosis during the antepartum period are available. Each of these viruses requires individual consideration for inclusion in screening and for the method of screening during the antepartum period. The availability of efficacious treatments for HCV and CMV, with demonstrable benefits to the mother or fetus, is required before antepartum screening for these infections can be justified. Screening for parvovirus B19 presents a greater concern because it meets most of the features of a screening test (Wilson’s criteria) endorsed by the WHO. There is insufficient evidence to argue strongly for implementation of antepartum PVB19 screening, but the available evidence indicates a need for large studies of potential effectiveness and costs of routine PVB19 screening, either for all pregnant woman or for those at high risk of exposure to PVB19. While the technology to screen for HCV, PVB19, and CMV certainly exists, there must be careful consideration of the downstream implications of routine screening at the level of the individual patient, the general population, and other health care resources, including laboratory infrastructure, before recommending that these infections be screened for routinely in the antepartum period. A strategy for national adoption of an opt-out screening strategy for HIV should be considered.

This document has been archived because it contains outdated information. It should not be consulted for clinical use, but for historical research only. Please visit the journal website for the most recent guidelines.

Objective: We sought to determine the interventions utilized by maternal-fetal medicine specialists in the prediction and prevention of preterm labor in higher-order multiple (HOM) gestations., Study Design: Online questionnaires and email surveys were sent to all the maternal-fetal medicine specialists in Canada (n=122). Questionnaire items included interventions physicians routinely recommended for HOM gestations including: (1) bed rest; (2) cervical length measurement on transvaginal ultrasound; (3) corticosteroids use; (4) cerclage; and (5) tocolytic therapy., Results: Response rate was 66% (81/122), with 68% of respondents in practice for >10 years. Of physicians, 91% did not routinely recommend bed rest (95% confidence interval [CI], 84.7-97.2). In all, 82% (95% CI, 73.63-90.4%) recommended routine cervical length assessment with 32.3% (95% CI, 20.7-43.2) and 37.1% (95% CI, 25.3-48.6) of this group suggesting assessment at 16-18 and 19-21 weeks, respectively. Frequency of assessment varied from biweekly (53.3%; 95% CI, 40.9-65.0), to monthly (23.3%; 95% CI, 12.8-33.1), to a single measurement repeated only if abnormal (12.5%; 95% CI, 4.5-20.8). In all, 28% (95% CI, 18.2-37.8) recommended routine administration of corticosteroids for lung maturation. Timing of administration varied, with 24% initiating steroids between 24-26 weeks, 59% between 27-28 weeks, and 17% after 28 weeks. None reported routine cerclage placement. However, 71% (95% CI, 61.1-80.8) would perform cerclage based on history or ultrasound. Of respondents, 81% (95% CI, 72.4-89.5) would consider using tocolytic agents for threatened preterm labor including calcium channel blockers (94%), nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (5%), and nitroglycerin transdermal patch (24%)., Conclusion: The variable practice guidelines and paucity of data for management of HOM pregnancy places the onus on individual practitioners to develop their own management schemes. This results in heterogeneous management, which is based on conflicting international guidelines, studies, expert opinion, or past experience., (Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: To review the effect of assisted human reproduction (AHR) on perinatal outcomes, to identify areas requiring further research with regard to birth outcomes and AHR, and to provide guidelines to optimize obstetrical management and counselling of prospective Canadian parents., Outcomes: This document compares perinatal outcomes of different types of AHR pregnancies with each other and with those of spontaneously conceived pregnancies. Clinicians will be better informed about the adverse outcomes that have been documented in association with AHR, including obstetrical complications, adverse perinatal outcomes, multiple gestations, structural congenital abnormalities, chromosomal abnormalities, and imprinting disorders., Evidence: Published literature was retrieved through searches of MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library from January 2005 to December 2012 using appropriate controlled vocabulary and key words (assisted reproduction, assisted reproductive technology, ovulation induction, intracytoplasmic sperm injection, embryo transfer, and in vitro fertilization). Results were not restricted to systematic reviews, randomized control trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies; studies of all designs published in English from January 2005 to December 2012 were reviewed, and additional publications were identified from the bibliographies of these articles. Searches were updated on a regular basis and incorporated in the guideline to August 2013. Grey (unpublished) literature was identified through searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology assessment-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, and national and international medical specialty societies., Values: The quality of evidence in this document was rated using the criteria described in the Report of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (Table 1). Summary Statements 1. There is increasing evidence that infertility or subfertility is an independent risk factor for obstetrical complications and adverse perinatal outcomes, even without the addition of assisted human reproduction. (II-2) 2. The relative risk for an imprinting phenotype such as Silver-Russell syndrome, Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome, or Angelman syndrome is increased in the assisted reproduction population, but the actual risk for one of these phenotypes to occur in an assisted pregnancy is estimated to be low, at less than 1 in 5000. The exact biological etiology for this increased imprinting risk is likely heterogeneous and requires more research. (II-2) Recommendations 1. All men with severe oligozoospermia or azoospermia (sperm count < 5 million/hpf) should be offered genetic/clinical counselling, karyotype assessment for chromosomal abnormalities, and Y-chromosome microdeletion testing prior to in vitro fertilization with intracytoplasmic sperm injection. (II-2A) 2. All men with unexplained obstructive azoospermia should be offered genetic/clinical counselling and genetic testing for cystic fibrosis prior to in vitro fertilization with intracytoplasmic sperm injection. (II-2A) 3. Multiple pregnancy is the most powerful predictive factor for adverse maternal, obstetrical, and perinatal outcomes. Couples should be thoroughly counselled about the significant risks of multiple pregnancies associated with all assisted human reproductive treatments. (II-2A) 4. The benefits and cumulative pregnancy rates of elective single embryo transfer support a policy of using this protocol in couples with good prognosis for success, and elective single embryo transfer should be strongly encouraged in this population. (II-2A) 5. To reduce the incidence of multiple pregnancy, health care policies that support public funding for assisted human reproduction, with regulations promoting best practice regarding elective single embryo transfer, should be strongly encouraged. (II-2A) 6. Among singleton pregnancies, assisted reproductive technology is associated with increased risks of preterm birth and low birth weight infants, and ovulation induction is associated with an increased risk of low birth weight infants. Until sufficient research has clarified the independent roles of infertility and treatment for infertility, couples should be counselled about the risks associated with treatment. (II-2B) There is a role for closer obstetric surveillance of women who conceive with assisted human reproduction. (III-L) 7. There is growing evidence that pregnancy outcomes are better for cryopreserved embryos fertilized in vitro than for fresh embryo transfers. This finding supports a policy of elective single embryo transfer for women with a good prognosis (with subsequent use of cryopreserved embryos as necessary), and may reassure women who are considering in vitro fertilization. (II-2A) 8. Women and couples considering assisted human reproduction and concerned about perinatal outcomes in singleton pregnancies should be advised that (1) intracytoplasmic sperm injection does not appear to confer increased adverse perinatal or maternal risk over standard in vitro fertilization, and (2) the use of donor oocytes increases successful pregnancy rates in selected women, but even when accounting for maternal age, can increase the risks of low birth weight and preeclampsia. (II-2B) 9. Any assisted reproductive technology procedure should be prefaced by a discussion of fetal outcomes and the slight increase in the risk of congenital structural abnormalities, with emphasis on known confounding factors such as infertility and body mass index. (II-2B) 10. In pregnancies achieved by artificial reproductive technology, routine anatomic ultrasound for congenital structural abnormalities is recommended between 18 and 22 weeks. (II-2A) 11. Pregnancies conceived by intracytoplasmic sperm injection may be at increased risk of chromosomal aberrations, including sex chromosome abnormalities. Diagnostic testing should be offered after appropriate counselling. (II-2A) 12. The possible increased risk for late onset cancer due to gene dysregulation for tumour suppression requires more long-term follow-up before the true risk can be determined. (III-A) 13. The clinical application of preimplantation genetic testing in fertile couples must balance the benefits of avoiding disease transmission with the medical risks and financial burden of in vitro fertilization. (III-B) 14. Preimplantation screening for aneuploidy is associated with inconsistent findings for improving pregnancy outcomes. Any discussion of preimplantation genetic screening with patients should clarify that there is no adequate information on the long-term effect of embryo single cell biopsy. (I-C).

Objectives: To evaluate the performance of integrated prenatal screening (IPS) and first trimester combined screening (FTS) for trisomy 21 in a large Canadian urban center., Method: Prospective data collection on women having FTS at one center from 1 November 2003 to 31 December 2005, or IPS at another from 1 January 2003 to 31 December 2005. A positive screen was defined as adjusted risk for trisomy 21 >or= 1/200 at term or nuchal translucency >or= 3.5 mm., Results: 32 227 and 14 487 women were screened in the IPS and FTS programs, respectively. Detection rates (DRs) and positive rates (PRs) for trisomy 21 were 88.4% (95% CI: 81.6-91.5) and 3.3% (95% CI: 3.1-3.5) for IPS, and 83.9% (95% CI: 74.7-93.0) and 4.0% (95% CI: 3.7-4.3) for FTS. DR adjusted for viability bias was 85.2% for IPS and 78.6% for FTS. Applying both the screens to the 78 134 women who submitted prenatal screens in Ontario in 2005, thereby eliminating the effect of differences in the distribution of maternal age between screens, gave a DR (corrected for viability bias) and PR of 81 and 3.1% for IPS, and 76 and 3.4% for FTS., Conclusions: Both IPS and FTS perform well and are feasible in a practical clinical setting.

The purpose of this study was to identify risk factors for fetal loss and other pregnancy complications associated with genetic amniocentesis. Data were acquired in the Canadian Early Amniocentesis Trial (CEMAT), a multicentered (12) prospective, randomized trial comparing continuous ultrasound-guided early amniocentesis (EA) and mid-trimester amniocentesis (MA) (CEMAT Group, 1998). Details of the procedure were recorded and analysed by allocation (EA versus MA), operator and centre, and correlated with pregnancy outcome. A total of 62 spontaneous pregnancy losses occurred between the procedure and 20 weeks' gestation among the 3691 patients who received their procedures within the allocated window (EA=53/1916, MA=9/1775). Technical factors correlating with these losses included procedures 'judged to be difficult' by the operator, and post-procedure amniotic fluid leakage or bleeding. Maternal risk factors included maternal hypertension (fetal loss 11. 1 per cent, compared with non-hypertensive women, 2.6 per cent) increased body mass index (BMI) and gravidity of three or greater. Allocation to EA was predictive of fetal loss, as well as failed procedure, multiple needle insertions, amniotic fluid leakage, failed culture and talipes equinovarus, in excess compared with MA. In conclusion, in this large prospective randomized trial evaluating amniocentesis, specific maternal, fetal and procedural variables were found to be predictive of fetal loss and adverse pregnancy outcome. Performing amniocentesis before 13 weeks' gestation (EA) was the major predictive factor for adverse outcome. These data suggest that first-trimester chorionic villus sampling (CVS) and MA will likely remain the invasive procedures of choice for evaluation of fetal karyotype., (Copyright 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)