4.5 Article

Overall evaluation of the clinical value of prenatal screening for fetal-free DNA in maternal blood

期刊

MEDICINE
卷 96, 期 27, 页码 -

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000007114

关键词

cffDNA; high-throughput sequencing; maternal; noninvasive prenatal testing; prenatal screening

资金

  1. project funding for the training of high-level health professionals in Changzhou [2016CZLJ013]
  2. project of social development in Changzhou [CE20155055]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To explore the clinical value of prenatal screening for fetal-free DNA in maternal blood. Methods: A total of 10,275 maternal blood samples were collected from October 2012 to May 2016 at the prenatal diagnosis center of Changzhou Woman and Children Health Hospital. Results: Among 10,275 pregnant women accepted noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT), 9 cases could not get the results after collected the blood second times. The rate of NIPT failure was 0.09%. Seventy-two cases got the NIPT positive results of trisomy 21/trisomy 18/trisomy 13, and the detection rate, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and false positive rate were 98.59%, 99.99%, 97.22%, and 0.02%. The top-3 indications of the study were advanced age women (34.90%), high risk (25.22%), and intermediate risk (19.56%). They all had the satisfactory results of NIPT. Fifty-seven pregnant women had the high risk of fetal sex chromosomal aneuploidies (SCA). After informed consent, 33 cases accepted prenatal diagnosis. Eighteen cases were confirmed as sex chromosome aneuploidies. The PPV was 54.54%. Compared with other SCA, the PPV of Turner syndrome was lower. One case was false negative after followed up. Conclusions: NIPT showed a broad application prospects for prenatal screening and diagnosis of fetal chromosomal diseases. We should deepen mining and analyzing the clinical data, and explore the use of NIPT more reasonably from the perspective of evidence-based medicine.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据