{"title":"鼻骨缺失或发育不良:如何告诉未来的父母?","authors":"Shreya Das, Charu Sharma, Taruna Yadav, Kalika Dubey, Shashank Shekhar, Pratibha Singh, Kuldeep Singh, Meenakshi Gothwal, Manisha Jhirwal, Dolat Singh Shekhawat","doi":"10.1002/bdr2.2348","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Absent or hypoplastic nasal bone (AHNB) on first or second-trimester ultrasonography (USG) is an important soft marker of Down syndrome. However, due to its varied incidence in euploid and aneuploid fetuses, there is always a dilemma of whether to go for invasive fetal testing for isolated AHNB. This study aims to assess outcomes specifically within the context of Indian ethnicity women.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>This was a prospective observational study. All patients who reported with AHNB in the first- or second-trimester USG were included. Genetic counseling was done, and noninvasive and invasive testing was offered. Chromosomal anomalies were meticulously recorded, and pregnancy was monitored.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The incidence of AHNB in our study was 1.16% (47/4051). Out of 47 women with AHNB, the isolated condition was seen in 32 (0.78%) cases, while AHNB with structural anomalies was seen in nine cases (0.22%). Thirty-nine women opted for invasive testing. Six out of 47 had aneuploidy (12.7%), while two euploid cases (4.25%) developed nonimmune hydrops. The prevalence of Down syndrome in fetuses with AHNB was 8.5% (4/47) and 0.42% (17/4004) in fetuses with nasal bone present. This difference was statistically significant (<i>p</i> = .001).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The results indicate that isolated AHNB cases should be followed by a comprehensive anomaly scan rather than immediately recommending invasive testing. However, invasive testing is required when AHNB is associated with other soft markers or abnormalities. As chromosomal microarray is more sensitive than standard karyotype in detecting chromosomal aberrations, it should be chosen over karyotype.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":9121,"journal":{"name":"Birth Defects Research","volume":"116 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Absent or hypoplastic nasal bone: What to tell the prospective parents?\",\"authors\":\"Shreya Das, Charu Sharma, Taruna Yadav, Kalika Dubey, Shashank Shekhar, Pratibha Singh, Kuldeep Singh, Meenakshi Gothwal, Manisha Jhirwal, Dolat Singh Shekhawat\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/bdr2.2348\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Absent or hypoplastic nasal bone (AHNB) on first or second-trimester ultrasonography (USG) is an important soft marker of Down syndrome. However, due to its varied incidence in euploid and aneuploid fetuses, there is always a dilemma of whether to go for invasive fetal testing for isolated AHNB. This study aims to assess outcomes specifically within the context of Indian ethnicity women.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>This was a prospective observational study. All patients who reported with AHNB in the first- or second-trimester USG were included. Genetic counseling was done, and noninvasive and invasive testing was offered. Chromosomal anomalies were meticulously recorded, and pregnancy was monitored.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>The incidence of AHNB in our study was 1.16% (47/4051). Out of 47 women with AHNB, the isolated condition was seen in 32 (0.78%) cases, while AHNB with structural anomalies was seen in nine cases (0.22%). Thirty-nine women opted for invasive testing. Six out of 47 had aneuploidy (12.7%), while two euploid cases (4.25%) developed nonimmune hydrops. The prevalence of Down syndrome in fetuses with AHNB was 8.5% (4/47) and 0.42% (17/4004) in fetuses with nasal bone present. This difference was statistically significant (<i>p</i> = .001).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>The results indicate that isolated AHNB cases should be followed by a comprehensive anomaly scan rather than immediately recommending invasive testing. However, invasive testing is required when AHNB is associated with other soft markers or abnormalities. As chromosomal microarray is more sensitive than standard karyotype in detecting chromosomal aberrations, it should be chosen over karyotype.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9121,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Birth Defects Research\",\"volume\":\"116 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Birth Defects Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bdr2.2348\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Birth Defects Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bdr2.2348","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Absent or hypoplastic nasal bone: What to tell the prospective parents?
Background
Absent or hypoplastic nasal bone (AHNB) on first or second-trimester ultrasonography (USG) is an important soft marker of Down syndrome. However, due to its varied incidence in euploid and aneuploid fetuses, there is always a dilemma of whether to go for invasive fetal testing for isolated AHNB. This study aims to assess outcomes specifically within the context of Indian ethnicity women.
Materials and Methods
This was a prospective observational study. All patients who reported with AHNB in the first- or second-trimester USG were included. Genetic counseling was done, and noninvasive and invasive testing was offered. Chromosomal anomalies were meticulously recorded, and pregnancy was monitored.
Results
The incidence of AHNB in our study was 1.16% (47/4051). Out of 47 women with AHNB, the isolated condition was seen in 32 (0.78%) cases, while AHNB with structural anomalies was seen in nine cases (0.22%). Thirty-nine women opted for invasive testing. Six out of 47 had aneuploidy (12.7%), while two euploid cases (4.25%) developed nonimmune hydrops. The prevalence of Down syndrome in fetuses with AHNB was 8.5% (4/47) and 0.42% (17/4004) in fetuses with nasal bone present. This difference was statistically significant (p = .001).
Conclusion
The results indicate that isolated AHNB cases should be followed by a comprehensive anomaly scan rather than immediately recommending invasive testing. However, invasive testing is required when AHNB is associated with other soft markers or abnormalities. As chromosomal microarray is more sensitive than standard karyotype in detecting chromosomal aberrations, it should be chosen over karyotype.
期刊介绍:
The journal Birth Defects Research publishes original research and reviews in areas related to the etiology of adverse developmental and reproductive outcome. In particular the journal is devoted to the publication of original scientific research that contributes to the understanding of the biology of embryonic development and the prenatal causative factors and mechanisms leading to adverse pregnancy outcomes, namely structural and functional birth defects, pregnancy loss, postnatal functional defects in the human population, and to the identification of prenatal factors and biological mechanisms that reduce these risks.
Adverse reproductive and developmental outcomes may have genetic, environmental, nutritional or epigenetic causes. Accordingly, the journal Birth Defects Research takes an integrated, multidisciplinary approach in its organization and publication strategy. The journal Birth Defects Research contains separate sections for clinical and molecular teratology, developmental and reproductive toxicology, and reviews in developmental biology to acknowledge and accommodate the integrative nature of research in this field. Each section has a dedicated editor who is a leader in his/her field and who has full editorial authority in his/her area.