title: Is rapid aneuploidy screening used alone acceptable in prenatal diagnosis? An evaluation of the possible role of ultrasound examination.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The objectives of this study were to use a factual basis to: (1) determine the number, nature, and probable phenotypic consequences of karyotype anomalies that would probably be missed (structural anomalies, uncommon aneuploidies and mosaic aneuploidies) by rapid aneuploidy screening (RAS), and (2) appraise whether RAS can replace traditional karyotyping when amniocenteses are performed for increased risk of Down's syndrome by maternal serum screening or advanced maternal age in the absence of ultrasound abnormality.
  
  
  METHODS
  This retrospective cohort study analysed the indications, results and outcomes of 5,713 consecutive amniocenteses over a 5-year period at a single prenatal diagnosis centre in Paris.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Advanced maternal age and increased Down's risk with maternal serum marker were the most common indications. Chromosome abnormalities were detected in 3.64% of the pregnancies tested, and unexpected structural anomalies in 0.63% (n = 36). Translocations were more likely to be reciprocal, balanced and of parental origin. There were 6 mosaic gonosomal aneuploidies. Overall, 4 mosaic autosomal aneuploidies and 36 structural aberrations would not have been recognised by RAS alone. Of the 4 mosaic autosomal aneuploidies, all were terminated, one had major malformations and the others had discrete signs that a good quality ultrasound examination would probably not detect. Of the 36 structural aberrations, 24 would be undetected by ultrasound scan, from which 6 would be associated with a significant risk of an abnormal phenotype outcome.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  In conclusion, our data do not provide evidence that RAS can replace the traditional karyotype. It is probably impossible to arrive in a universal conclusion of which approach (karyotype or RAS) is definitely better than the other. Each prenatal centre could have its own approach depending on the local data analysis, including quality control of ultrasounds.
authors.affiliation: Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hôpital d'Instruction des Armées Begin, Saint-Mandé, France. patrice.gaudry@laposte.net
authors.forename: P
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Gaudry
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Lebbar
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Choiset
authors.forename: S
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Girard
authors.forename: F
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Lewin
authors.forename: V
authors.initials: V
authors.lastname: Tsatsaris
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Grangé
mesh_terms: D000649:Amniocentesis; D002869:Chromosome Aberrations; D025063:Chromosome Disorders / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D000013:Congenital Abnormalities / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000235:genetics; D005260:Female; D005820:Genetic Testing / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D011247:Pregnancy; D011256:Pregnancy Outcome; D011296:Prenatal Diagnosis; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D016216:Ultrasonography, Prenatal