title: Termination of pregnancy for renal malformations.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  We studied the correlation between prenatal diagnosis and postmortem investigations in pregnancies terminated for renal malformations.
  
  
  METHODS
  Over a 5-year period, 77 cases of termination of pregnancy (TOP) for renal malformations were reviewed. Chromosomal anomalies (n = 9) and cases without conventional or virtual autopsy were excluded (n = 15). In 53 cases, prenatal ultrasound diagnosis and conventional autopsy findings were compared. In addition, we compared the accuracy of conventional and virtual autopsy findings in 17 cases.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Full agreement was observed in 60.4% (32/53) of cases. In 26.4% (14/53) of the cases, the presence of additional malformations did not alter the final diagnosis. However, in 11.3% (6/53) the final diagnosis was adjusted because of major additional findings. One case showed a total disagreement. Conventional and virtual autopsy were in full agreement in 52.9% (9/17). Postmortem magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) description and detection of malformations was less complete and failed to correctly diagnose 5/17 cases (29.4%). In 17.6% (3/17) of the cases, postmortem MRI revealed malformations not confirmed by conventional autopsy.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  A high correlation between prenatal ultrasound and postmortem investigations was observed. Conventional autopsy remains the gold standard to reveal additional major and minor malformations, leading to a correct final diagnosis. The added value of virtual necropsy for renal pathology was limited.
authors.affiliation: Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Hospitals Gasthuisberg - KU Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000, Leuven, Belgium, eva.simoens@uzleuven.be.
authors.forename: Eva
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Simoens
authors.forename: An
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Hindryckx
authors.forename: Philippe
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Moerman
authors.forename: Filip
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Claus
authors.forename: Luc
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: De Catte
mesh_terms: D037881:Aborted Fetus / Q000473:pathology*; D000025:Abortion, Eugenic / Q000379:methods; D001344:Autopsy / Q000379:methods / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D005260:Female; D005315:Fetal Diseases / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000601:surgery; D005858:Germany; D006801:Humans; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging / Q000379:methods; D017063:Outcome Assessment, Health Care; D011247:Pregnancy; D011296:Prenatal Diagnosis / Q000379:methods / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D011446:Prospective Studies; D016216:Ultrasonography, Prenatal / Q000379:methods; D014564:Urogenital Abnormalities / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000601:surgery; D014570:Urologic Diseases / Q000151:congenital / Q000175:diagnosis*
references.citation: J Clin Diagn Res. 2012 Dec;6(10):1615-9
references.pmid: 23373012
references.citation: Prenat Diagn. 2013 Dec;33(12):1167-72
references.pmid: 23943585
references.citation: J Perinatol. 2008 Nov;28(11):736-42
references.pmid: 18596710
references.citation: Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2007 May;92(3):F215-8
references.pmid: 17449856
references.citation: Lancet. 2013 Jul 20;382(9888):223-33
references.pmid: 23683720
references.citation: Prenat Diagn. 2010 Aug;30(8):713-8
references.pmid: 20661883
references.citation: Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2010 Jun;50(3):237-41
references.pmid: 20618240
references.citation: BMC Pediatr. 2011 Dec 22;11:120
references.pmid: 22192497
references.citation: J Perinatol. 2006 Apr;26(4):224-9
references.pmid: 16541112
references.citation: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013 Jul;8(7):1179-87
references.pmid: 23539225
references.citation: J Clin Ultrasound. 2010 Jun;38(5):244-9
references.pmid: 20336773
references.citation: Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2006 Dec;28(7):925-33
references.pmid: 17121414
references.citation: Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2006;85(10 ):1208-16
references.pmid: 17068680
references.citation: Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2012 Mar;91(3):386-90
references.pmid: 22122607
references.citation: Fetal Diagn Ther. 2011;30(4):317-8
references.pmid: 21997351
references.citation: Prenat Diagn. 2014 Aug;34(8):784-9
references.pmid: 24687533
references.citation: BMJ. 2004 Jan 17;328(7432):137
references.pmid: 14662522
references.citation: Prenat Diagn. 2007 May;27(5):457-62
references.pmid: 17335106
references.citation: Prenat Diagn. 2014 Mar;34(3):285-90
references.pmid: 24395147
references.citation: Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2010 Dec;111(3):209-12
references.pmid: 20870231
references.citation: Eur J Med Genet. 2005 Apr-Jun;48(2):131-44
references.pmid: 16053904
references.citation: BMJ. 2002 Mar 30;324(7340):761-3
references.pmid: 11923158
references.citation: J Prenat Med. 2012 Apr;6(2):13-7
references.pmid: 22905306
references.citation: Pediatr Nephrol. 2012 Mar;27(3):497-502
references.pmid: 22167562
references.citation: Di Yi Jun Yi Da Xue Xue Bao. 2005 Sep;25(9):1086-9
references.pmid: 16174570