Uptake of invasive prenatal tests in pregnancies conceived via assisted reproductive technologies: The experience in Queensland, Australia

View/ Open
Author(s)
Hunt, Lauren
Peterson, Madelyn
Sinnott, Stephen
Sutton, Bridget
Cincotta, Robert
Duncombe, Gregory
Chua, Jackie
McInerney-Leo, Aideen
Year published
2012
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Objective Prenatal diagnosis of a chromosomal abnormality currently involves the use of an invasive procedure, which has a risk of fetal loss. The aim of this study was to identify whether pregnancies conceived via assisted reproductive technologies were more or less likely to be subjected to an invasive procedure compared with pregnancies that were conceived spontaneously. Method Population data were collated from three private ultrasound clinics across southeast Queensland, Australia. Results Of the 15?032 spontaneously conceived pregnancies, 775 (5.2%) had invasive testing, while 95 (6.0%) of the 1581 pregnancies ...
View more >Objective Prenatal diagnosis of a chromosomal abnormality currently involves the use of an invasive procedure, which has a risk of fetal loss. The aim of this study was to identify whether pregnancies conceived via assisted reproductive technologies were more or less likely to be subjected to an invasive procedure compared with pregnancies that were conceived spontaneously. Method Population data were collated from three private ultrasound clinics across southeast Queensland, Australia. Results Of the 15?032 spontaneously conceived pregnancies, 775 (5.2%) had invasive testing, while 95 (6.0%) of the 1581 pregnancies conceived through assisted reproductive technologies had invasive testing. When the uptake of testing is adjusted by the maternal age the assisted reproductive population was significantly less likely to pursue invasive testing (p?=?0.003). Similarly when adjusted for the combined first trimester screen risk estimate, the assisted reproduction population is significantly less likely to undergo invasive testing than the spontaneous population (p?=?0.005). Conclusion Pregnancies conceived using assisted reproductive technologies are significantly less likely to be subjected to invasive testing than pregnancies conceived spontaneously in women of the same age and combined first trimester screen risk.
View less >
View more >Objective Prenatal diagnosis of a chromosomal abnormality currently involves the use of an invasive procedure, which has a risk of fetal loss. The aim of this study was to identify whether pregnancies conceived via assisted reproductive technologies were more or less likely to be subjected to an invasive procedure compared with pregnancies that were conceived spontaneously. Method Population data were collated from three private ultrasound clinics across southeast Queensland, Australia. Results Of the 15?032 spontaneously conceived pregnancies, 775 (5.2%) had invasive testing, while 95 (6.0%) of the 1581 pregnancies conceived through assisted reproductive technologies had invasive testing. When the uptake of testing is adjusted by the maternal age the assisted reproductive population was significantly less likely to pursue invasive testing (p?=?0.003). Similarly when adjusted for the combined first trimester screen risk estimate, the assisted reproduction population is significantly less likely to undergo invasive testing than the spontaneous population (p?=?0.005). Conclusion Pregnancies conceived using assisted reproductive technologies are significantly less likely to be subjected to invasive testing than pregnancies conceived spontaneously in women of the same age and combined first trimester screen risk.
View less >
Journal Title
Prenatal Diagnosis
Volume
32
Issue
11
Copyright Statement
© 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. This is the pre-peer reviewed version of the following article: Uptake of invasive prenatal tests in pregnancies conceived via assisted reproductive technologies: The experience in Queensland, Australia, Prenatal Diagnosis, Vol. 32(11), 2012, pp. 1049-1052, which has been published in final form at http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pd.3953.
Subject
Clinical sciences