Isolated Echogenic Cardiac Focus: Assessing Association with Trisomy 21 by Combining Results from a Prenatal Center with a Bayesian Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Objective To investigate the clinical relevance of an isolated echogenic cardiac focus (iECF) as a marker for trisomy 21 using a large second-trimester collective including a low-risk subgroup.

Materials and Methods We retrospectively evaluated 1 25 211 pregnancies from 2000–2016 and analyzed all iECF cases with regard to chromosomal anomalies. It consisted of an early second-trimester collective from 14+0−17+6 weeks (n=34 791) and a second-trimester anomaly scan collective from 18+0–21+6 weeks. Two a priori risk subgroups (high and low risk) of the latter were built based on maternal age and previous screening test results using a cut-off of 1:300. Likelihood ratios (LR) of iECF for the detection of trisomy 21, trisomy 13, trisomy 18 and structural chromosomal anomalies were estimated.

Results In total, 1 04 001 patients were included. An iECF was found in 4416 of 1 02 847 euploid fetuses (4.29%) and in 64 of 557 cases with trisomy 21 (11.49%) giving a positive LR of 2.68 (CI: 2.12–3.2). The sensitivity was 11.5% at a false-positive rate of 4.29% (CI:4.17–4.42) with p≤0.01%. In the high-and low-risk subgroups, the prevalence of iECF was comparable: 5.08% vs. 5.05%. The frequency of trisomy 21 was 0.39%, 98/24 979 vs 0.16%, 69/44 103. LR+was 3.86 (2.43–5.14) and 2.59 (1.05–4). For both subgroups the association of iECF with trisomy 21 was statistically significant. The prevalence of structural chromosomal anomalies in the second-trimester anomaly scan collective was 0.08% (52/68 967), of which 2 showed an iECF.

Conclusion The detection of an iECF at the time of 14+0–21+6 weeks significantly increases the risk for trisomy 21 in the high-risk and in the low-risk subgroups and does not statistically change the risks for trisomy 13/18 or structural abnormalitie.

• References

• 1 Thompson MMR, Willard H. Genetics in Medicine. 5^th ed Philadelphia: Thompson and Thompson; 1991
• 2 Nicolaides KH, Azar G, Byrne D. et al. Fetal nuchal translucency: Ultrasound screening for chromosomal defects in first trimester of pregnancy. BMJ 1992; 304: 867-869
• 3 Alldred SK, Takwoingi Y, Guo B. et al. First trimester ultrasound tests alone or in combination with first trimester serum tests for Downʼs syndrome screening. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2017; 3: Cd012600
• 4 Audibert F, Dommergues M, Benattar C. et al. Screening for Down syndrome using first-trimester ultrasound and second-trimester maternal serum markers in a low-risk population: A prospective longitudinal study. Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology: The Official Journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 2001; 18: 26-31
• 5 Aagaard-Tillery KM, Malone FD, Nyberg DA. et al. Role of second-trimester genetic sonography after Down syndrome screening. Obstetrics and Gynecology 2009; 114: 1189-1196
• 6 Benacerraf BR. Should sonographic screening for fetal Down syndrome be applied to low risk women?. Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology: The Official Journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 2000; 15: 451-455
• 7 Doubilet PM, Copel JA, Benson CB. et al. Choroid plexus cyst and echogenic intracardiac focus in women at low risk for chromosomal anomalies: The obligation to inform the mother. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine: Official Journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine 2004; 23: 883-885
• 8 Rodriguez R, Herrero B, Bartha JL. The continuing enigma of the fetal echogenic intracardiac focus in prenatal ultrasound. Current Opinion in Obstetrics & Gynecology 2013; 25: 145-151
• 9 Bromley B, Lieberman E, Laboda L. et al. Echogenic intracardiac focus: A sonographic sign for fetal Down syndrome. Obstetrics and Gynecology 1995; 86: 998-1001
• 10 Nyberg DA, Souter VL, El-Bastawissi A. et al. Isolated sonographic markers for detection of fetal Down syndrome in the second trimester of pregnancy. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine: Official Journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine 2001; 20: 1053-1063
• 11 Nicolaides KH, Wegrzyn P. [Sonographic features of chromosomal defects in the second trimester of pregnancy]. Ginekologia polska 2005; 76: 528-535
• 12 Vintzileos AM, Egan JF. Adjusting the risk for trisomy 21 on the basis of second-trimester ultrasonography. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1995; 172: 837-844
• 13 Winter TC, Anderson AM, Cheng EY. et al. Echogenic intracardiac focus in 2nd-trimester fetuses with trisomy 21: Usefulness as a US marker. Radiology 2000; 216: 450-456
• 14 Anderson N, Jyoti R. Relationship of isolated fetal intracardiac echogenic focus to trisomy 21 at the mid-trimester sonogram in women younger than 35 years. Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology: The Official Journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 2003; 21: 354-358
• 15 Bromley B, Lieberman E, Shipp TD. et al. Significance of an echogenic intracardiac focus in fetuses at high and low risk for aneuploidy. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine: Official Journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine 1998; 17: 127-131
• 16 Vibhakar NI, Budorick NE, Scioscia AL. et al. Prevalence of aneuploidy with a cardiac intraventricular echogenic focus in an at-risk patient population. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine: Official Journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine 1999; 18: 265-268 quiz 269-270
• 17 Weisz B, Pandya PP, David AL. et al. Ultrasound findings after screening for down syndrome using the integrated test. Obstetrics and Gynecology 2007; 109: 1046-1052
• 18 Shanks AL, Odibo AO, Gray DL. Echogenic intracardiac foci: associated with increased risk for fetal trisomy 21 or not?. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine: Official Journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine 2009; 28: 1639-1643
• 19 Huang SY, Shaw SW, Cheuh HY. et al. Intracardiac echogenic focus and trisomy 21 in a population previously evaluated by first-trimester combined screening. Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica 2010; 89: 1017-1023
• 20 Verde PE, Ohmann C. Combining randomized and non-randomized evidence in clinical research: a review of methods and applications. Research Synthesis Methods 2015; Mar 6: 45-62
• 21 Agathokleous M, Chaveeva P, Poon LC. et al. Meta-analysis of second-trimester markers for trisomy 21. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology: The Official Journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 2013; 41: 247-261
• 22 Verde PE. bamdit: An R Package for bayesian meta-analysis of diagnostic test data. Journal of Statistical Software 2018; 86: 1-32
• 23 Sepulveda W, Cullen S, Nicolaidis P. et al. Echogenic foci in the fetal heart: a marker of chromosomal abnormality. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1995; 102: 490-492
• 24 Roberts DJ, Genest D. Cardiac histologic pathology characteristic of trisomies 13 and 21. Hum Pathol 1992; 23: 1130-1140
• 25 Lehman CD, Nyberg DA, Winter TC. et al. Trisomy 13 syndrome: Prenatal US findings in a review of 33 cases. Radiology 1995; 194: 217-222
• 26 Kozlowski P, Burkhardt T, Gembruch U. et al. DEGUM, OGUM, SGUM and FMF Germany recommendations for the implementation of first-trimester screening, detailed ultrasound, cell-free dna screening and diagnostic procedures. Ultraschall in Med (Stuttgart, Germany: 1980). 2018 DOI: 10.1055/a-0631-8898
• 27 Revello R, Sarno L, Ispas A. et al. Screening for trisomies by cell-free DNA testing of maternal blood: Consequences of a failed result. Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology: The Official Journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 2016; 47: 698-704
• 28 Akolekar R, Beta J, Picciarelli G. et al. Procedure-related risk of miscarriage following amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology: The Official Journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 2015; 45: 16-26