Can Prenatal Testing in the First Trimester be Performed without Ultrasound?

The introduction of NIPT (noninvasive prenatal testing) [1] [2] [3] [4] [5], i. e., the analysis of cell-free fetal DNA from the maternal blood to diagnose fetal chromosomal abnormalities, has resulted in a rapid change in prenatal testing around the world and a significant reduction is invasive procedures. The ease of the procedure (simple blood withdrawal from the mother), the relatively high detection rate for the most common chromosomal abnormalities (trisomy 21: 99.3 [5]-99.4 % [6], trisomy 18: 97.4 % [5] – 97.7 % [6], trisomy 13: 90.6 % [6] – 97.4 % [5], monosomy X: 90.3 [7] – 92.9 % [6], other anomalies of the sex chromosomes (without monosomy X): 93.0 % [7] and also some individual deletions [8] [9]), and the demand for increasingly early diagnosis have resulted in some patients being offered such a blood test as early as the 7th week of gestation [10], i. e., 4 – 5 weeks before first-trimester screening [11] [12] [13] with qualified ultrasound examination [14] is possible.

NIPT continues to be merely a supplementary, not a diagnostic, screening method that can yield false-positive [5] [15] [16] as well as false-negative results [17], albeit in a limited number of cases. Moreover, a result cannot be reached in the case of a low fetal DNA rate of less than 4 % as seen, for example, in very obese patients [18]. Depending of the sequencing method, a failure rate of between 1.58 % (massive parallel sequencing) and 6.39 % (SNP analysis) has been described [19]. NIPT cannot be used in the case of a high-grade multiple pregnancy, a vanishing twin, chromosomal mosaicism, and, depending on the sequencing method that is used, can only be used on a limited basis in the case of egg donation (the SNP method does not yield a result in this case).

If patients are not properly counceled, a negative NIPT result, i. e., no indication of the chromosomal abnormalities included in this testing, often results in patients believing that all chromosomal abnormalities as well as other malformations of the embryo/fetus can be ruled out. Chromosomal abnormalities account for only approximately 8.5 % of the total spectrum of anomalies [20]. The large majority of abnormalities are structural and can only be detected in the first trimester by a qualified ultrasound examination [14]. This includes severe CNS and facial deformities, spinal defects, thoracic, cardiac, and abdominal defects, severe urogenital defects, extremity defects, and twin deformities. A negative NIPT result therefore does not rule out severe defects, such as anencephaly.

Every positive NIPT result must be confirmed by invasive testing (CVS, amniocentesis) [3] [21]. This is performed under ultrasound guidance. In the case of a very early positive NIPT result, i. e., at 8 or 9 gestational weeks, the waiting time of 3 – 4 weeks until a diagnosis can be made via chorionic villus sampling puts an enormous psychological strain on the patient.

NIPT is not a replacement for first-trimester screening that includes sonographic examination of the fetus and can detect an abnormal nuchal translucency as well as other structural abnormalities [22] [23]. Therefore, NIPT can only be viewed as a supplementary screening method for detecting the most common chromosomal abnormalities and not as a replacement for ultrasound examination. If a missed abortion or a vanishing twin is detected by the ultrasound examination in the first trimester [24], NIPT is unnecessary. In the case of sonographic detection of a fetal malformation, NIPT is also no longer advisable. Chromosomal diagnosis via invasive testing and, if necessary, additional diagnosis via array CGH should be performed in this case.

However, care should also be taken in the case of ultrasound examinations in the first trimester. Some fetal anomalies are not yet able to be detected even by the most thorough ultrasound examination in the first trimester [22]. However, these are usually detected in the second trimester. Therefore, a follow-up ultrasound examination between gestational weeks 18 + 0 and 21 + 6 [25] continues to be an absolute requirement in prenatal testing.

• References

• 1 Lo YMD. Corbetta N. Chamberlain PF. et al. Presence of fetal DNA in maternal plasma and serum. Lancet 1997; 350: 485-487
• 2 Bianchi DW. Parker RL. Wentworth J. et al. DNA sequencing versus standard prenatal aneuploidy screening. N Engl JMed 2014; 370: 799-808
• 3 Schmid M. Klaritsch P. Arzt W. et al. Cell-free DNA testing for fetal chromosomal anomalies in clinical practice: Austrian-German-Swiss recommend-dations for non-invasive prenatal tests (NIPT). Ultraschall in Med 2015; 36: 507-510
• 4 Eiben B. Krapp M. Borth H. et al. Single Nucleotide Polymorphism-Based Analysis of Cell-Free Fetal DNA in 3000 Cases from Germany and Austria. Ultrasound International Open 2015; 1: E8-E11
• 5 Taylor-Phillips S. Freeman K. Geppert J. et al. Accuracy of non-invasive prenatal testing using cell-free DNA for detection of Down, Edwards and Patau syndromes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open 2016; 6: e010002
• 6 Mackie FL. Hemming K. Allen S. et al. The accuracy of cell-free fetal DNA-based non-invasive prenatal testing in singleton pregnancies: a systematic review and bivariate meta-analysis. BJOG 2017; 124: 32-46
• 7 Gil MM. Quezada MS. Revello R. et al. Analysis of cell-free DNA in maternal blood in screening for fetal aneuploidies: updated meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015; 45: 249-266
• 8 Gross SJ. Stosic M. McDonald-McGinn DM. et al. Clinical experience with single-nucleotide polymorphism-based non-invasive prenatal screening for 22q11.2 deletion syndrome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2016; 47: 177-183
• 9 Jia Y. Zhao H. Shi D. et al. Genetic effects of a 13q31.1 microdeletion detected by noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT). Int J Clin Exp Pathol 2014; 7: 7003-7011
• 10 Long AA. Abuhamad AZ. Warsof SL. Modifying risk of aneuploidy with a positive cell-free fetal DNA result. Clin Lab Med 2016; 36: 249-259
• 11 Nicolaides KH. Spencer K. Avgidou K. et al. Multicenter study of first-trimester screening for trisomy 21 in 75 821 pregnancies: results and estimation of the potential impact of individual risk-orientated two stage first-trimester screening. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2005; 25: 221-226
• 12 Kagan KO. Hoopmann M. Hammer R. et al. Screening for chromosomal abnormalities by first trimester combined screening and noninvasive prenatal testing. Ultraschall in Med 2015; 36: 40-46
• 13 Merz E. Thode C. Eiben B. et al. Prenatal Risk Calculation (PRC) 3.0: An Extended DoE-Based First-Trimester Screening Algorithm Allowing For Early Blood Sampling. Ultrasound Int Open 2016; 2: E19-E26 . Epub 2016 Feb 23
• 14 von Kaisenberg C. Chaoui R. Häusler M. et al. Quality Requirements for the early Fetal Ultrasound assessment at 11–13+6 weeks of gestation (DEGUM Levels II and III). Ultraschall in Med 2016; 37: 297-302
• 15 Dugo N. Padula F. Mobili L. et al. Six consecutive false positive cases from cell-free fetal DNA testing in a single referring centre. J Prenat Med 2014; 8: 31-35
• 16 Van Opstal D. Srebniak MI. Cytogenetic confirmation of a positive NIPT result: evidence-based choice between chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis depending on chromosome aberration. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 2016; 16: 513-520
• 17 Van Opstal D. Srebniak MI. Polak J. et al. False negative NIPT results: risk figures for chromosomes 13, 18 and 21 base on chorionic villi results in 5967 cases and literature review. PLOS one
• 18 Ashoor G. Syngelaki A. Poon LC. et al. Fetal fraction in maternal plasma cell-free DNA at 11–13 weeks' gestation: relation to maternal and fetal characteristics. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013; 41: 26-32
• 19 Yaron Y. The implications of non-invasive prenatal testing failures: a review of an under-discussed phenomenon. Prenat Diagn 2016; 36: 391-396
• 20 Wiesel A. Stolz G. Queisser-Wahrendorf A. Fehlbildungen: Häufigkeiten und Risiko-faktoren. Aktuelle Daten aus dem Geburtenregister Mainzer Modell (MaMo). Kinder- und Jugendarzt 2016; 10: 688-672
• 21 ISUOG consensus statement on the impact of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) on prenatal ultrasound practice. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014; 44: 122-123
• 22 Bromley B. Shipp TD. Lyons J. et al. Detection of fetal structural anomalies in a basic first-trimester screening program for aneuploidy. J Ultrasound Med 2014; 33: 1737-1745
• 23 Rossi AC. Prefumo F. Accuracy of ultrasonography at 11–14 weeks of gestation for detection of fetal structural anomalies: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol 2013; 122: 1160-1167
• 24 Rempen A. Chaoui R. Häusler M. et al. Quality requirements for ultrasound examination in early pregnancy (DEGUM Level I) between 4+0 and 13+6 weeks of gestation. DEGUM Level III Group Recommendations of the Section Obstetrics and Gynecology, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Ultraschall in der Medizin (DEGUM). Ultraschall in Med 2016; 37: 579-583
• 25 Merz E. Eichhorn KH. von Kaisenberg C. et al. Arbeitsgruppe der DEGUM-Stufe III. Updated quality requirements regarding secondary differentiated ultrasound exami-nation in prenatal diagnostics (= DEGUM Level II) in the period from 18 + 0 to 21 + 6 weeks of gestation. Ultraschall in Med 2012; 33: 593-596