切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"
高级检索
中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版)

中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版) ›› 2022, Vol. 18 ›› Issue (06) : 685 -691. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2022.06.010

论著

孕妇无创产前检测结果的大样本分析
张禾璇†(), 宋咏刚, 杨雪   
  1. 贵州省贵阳市妇幼保健院优生遗传科，贵阳　550001
  • 收稿日期:2022-06-21 修回日期:2022-11-09 出版日期:2022-12-01
  • 通信作者: 张禾璇

Results of non-invasive prenatal testing to pregnant women: a large sample analysis

Hexuan Zhang†(), Yonggang Song, Xue Yang   

  1. Department of Eugenics and Genetics, Guiyang Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, Guiyang 550001, Guizhou Province, China
  • Received:2022-06-21 Revised:2022-11-09 Published:2022-12-01
  • Corresponding author: Hexuan Zhang
  • Supported by:
    Clinical Special Project of Science and Technology Plan of Guizhou Provincial Department of Science and Technology([2022]005); High-Level Innovative Youth Health Talent Training Program of Guiyang Health and Family Planning Commission([2018]017)
全文 ( ) 下载PDF ( ) 导出引用
引用本文：

张禾璇, 宋咏刚, 杨雪. 孕妇无创产前检测结果的大样本分析[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2022, 18(06): 685-691.

Hexuan Zhang, Yonggang Song, Xue Yang. Results of non-invasive prenatal testing to pregnant women: a large sample analysis[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2022, 18(06): 685-691.

目的

探讨孕妇无创产前检测(NIPT)大样本筛查结果分析及异常情况。

方法

选取2018年1月1日至2020年12月31日，在贵阳市妇幼保健院完成NIPT筛查的22 908例单胎妊娠孕妇为研究对象。对NIPT筛查结果显示高风险者，进一步采取羊水穿刺术进行胎儿染色体核型分析产前诊断。回顾性收集所有孕妇年龄、NIPT筛查指征、产前诊断结果等临床病例资料。本研究遵循的程序符合贵阳市妇幼保健院医学伦理委员会规定，并通过该伦理委员会审查及批准(审批文号：2021-56号)。

结果

①本组22 908例孕妇中，NIPT筛查指征包括：高龄(预产期年龄≥35岁)孕妇为7 286例(31.81%)，血清学筛查结果异常者为2 491例(10.87%)，因错过血清学筛查时间进行NIPT筛查者为610例(2.66%)，其他NIPT筛查指征(不良孕产史、胎儿超声提示脉络从囊肿、双胎之一停止发育等)为563例(2.46%)，无NIPT指征而自愿要求进行NIPT者为11 958例(52.20%)。②本组22 908例孕妇中，NIPT筛查结果为高风险者为363例(1.58%)，包括72例(0.31%)胎儿21-三体综合征(TS)、20例(0.09%)18-TS、10例(0.04%)13-TS与131例(0.57%)性染色体非整倍体(SCA)及130例(0.57%)其他染色体异常高风险；分别占363例NIPT高风险孕妇的19.83%(72/363)、5.51%(20/363)、2.75%(10/363)、36.09%(131/363)与35.81%(130/363)。③363例NIPT高风险孕妇中，298例(82.09%)接受羊水穿刺术进行胎儿染色体核型分析产前诊断，其结果与NIPT结果相符者共计186例(62.42%)。胎儿21-、18-、13-TS与SCA及其他染色体异常者的NIPT筛查确诊率分别为93.06%(67/72)、90.00%(18/20)、88.89%(8/9)、55.56%(70/126)、32.40%(23/71)。确诊胎儿21-TS、SCA的孕妇中，高龄孕妇分别占71.64%(48/67)与55.71%(39/70)。

结论

本研究纳入孕妇的NIPT高风险筛查结果以胎儿SCA、其他染色体异常与21-TS为主，孕妇高龄是胎儿21-TS、SCA高风险的重要影响因素。NIPT筛查结果准确度与胎儿染色体异常类型有关。

关键词: 无创产前检测, 产前诊断, 染色体畸变, 性染色体畸变, 母体血清学筛查, 孕妇, 胎儿
Objective

To investigate the analysis and abnormalities of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) results in a large sample of pregnant women.

Methods

A total of 22 908 pregnant women who underwent NIPT in Guiyang Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital from January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2020 were selected as research subjects. Further prenatal diagnosis by amniocentesis for karyotype analysis was performed on those with high risk of NIPT results. The age, NIPT indication, prenatal diagnosis results and other clinical data of all pregnant women were retrospectively collected. The procedure followed in this study was in accordance with the regulations of the Ethics Committee of Guiyang Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, and was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee (Approval No.2021-56).

Results

①Among 22 908 pregnant women, NIPT indications included: 7 286 cases (31.81%) of pregnant women with advanced age (≥35 years old at expected date of delivery), 2 491 cases (10.87%) with abnormal serological screening results, 610 cases (2.66%) received NIPT due to missed serological screening, 563 cases (2.46%) with other NIPT indications (poor pregnancy and labor history, choroids from cysts in fetal ultrasound, termination of one of the twins, etc.), and 11 958 cases (52.20%) volunteered for NIPT without NIPT indication. ②Among 22 908 pregnant women, 363 cases (1.58%) were with high risk of NIPT, including 72 cases (0.31%) of high risk of fetal 21-trisomy syndrome (TS), 20 cases (0.09%) of fetal 18-TS, 10 cases (0.04%) of 13-TS, 131 cases (0.57%) of sex chromosome aneuploidy (SCA) and 130 cases (0.57%) of other chromosomal abnormalities, respectively, accounting for 19.83% (72/363), 5.51% (20/363), 2.75% (10/363), 36.09% (131/363) and 35.81% (130/363) of the high risk of NIPT. ③Among 363 cases with high risk of NIPT, 298 cases (82.09%) received amniocentesis chromosome karyotype analysis. There were 186 cases (62.42%) with prenatal diagnosis results consistent with NIPT results. The diagnostic rate of NIPT screening for fetal 21-TS, 18-TS, 13-TS, SCA and other chromosomal abnormalities was 93.06% (67/72), 90.00% (18/20), 88.89% (8/9), 55.56% (70/126) and 32.40% (23/71), respectively. Among the pregnant women with confirmed fetal 21-TS and SCA, pregnant women with advanced age accounted for 71.64% (48/67) and 55.71% (39/70), respectively.

Conclusions

Fetal SCA, other chromosomal abnormalities and 21-TS are the main risk factors of NIPT in pregnant women in this study. The advanced age of pregnant women is an important factor affecting the high risk of fetal 21-TS and SCA. The accuracy of NIPT results is related to the types of chromosomal abnormalities.

Key words: Non-invasive prenatal testing, Prenatal diagnosis, Chromosome aberrations, Sex chromosome aberrations, Maternal serum screening tests, Pregnant women, Fetus
表1 本组22 908例NIPT孕妇NIPT筛查指征比较
NIPT筛查指征 例数 构成比(%)
孕妇高龄(预产期年龄≥35岁) 7 286 31.81
血清学筛查结果异常 2 491 10.87
错过血清学筛查时间 610 2.66
其他NIPT筛查指征a 563 2.46
自愿进行NIPT筛查b 11 958 52.20
合计 22 908 100.00
表2 本组22 908例NIPT筛查结果为高、低风险孕妇的NIPT筛查指征及二胎妊娠占比比较[例数(%)]
NIPT筛查结果 例数 孕妇高龄 自愿进行NIPT筛查a 血清学筛查结果异常 错过血清学筛查时间 其他NIPT筛查指征b 二胎妊娠
高风险 363 106(29.20) 190(52.34) 30(8.26) 20(5.51) 17(4.68) 79(21.76)
低风险 22 545 7 180(31.85) 11 768(52.20) 2 461(10.92) 590(2.62) 546(2.42) 3 807(16.89)
χ2值 1.15 0.01 2.59 11.53 7.62 6.03
P值 0.283 0.956 0.107 <0.001 0.006 0.014
表3 本组363例NIPT筛查结果为胎儿染色体不同非整倍体异常孕妇的NIPT筛查指征及二胎妊娠占比比较[例数(%)]
NIPT筛查结果 例数 孕妇高龄 自愿进行NIPT筛查a 血清学筛查结果异常 错过血清学筛查时间 其他NIPT筛查指征b 二胎妊娠
21-TS高风险 72 52(72.22) 9(12.50) 10(13.89) 0(0) 1(1.39) 15(20.83)
18-TS高风险 20 8(40.00) 9(45.00) 2(10.00) 1(5.00) 0(0) 3(15.00)
13-TS高风险 10 1(10.00) 7(70.00) 1(10.00) 0(0) 1(10.00) 2(20.00)
SCA 131 26(19.85) 78(59.54) 13(9.92) 13(9.92) 1(0.76) 46(35.11)
胎儿其他染色体异常 130 19(14.62) 87(66.92) 4(3.08) 6(4.62) 14(10.77) 13(10.00)
合计 363 106(29.20) 190(52.34) 30(8.26) 20(5.51) 17(4.68) 79(21.76)
表4 NIPT筛查结果为高风险的298例孕妇的NIPT筛查指征及进一步产前诊断情况与二胎妊娠占比比较[例数(%)]
NIPT筛查结果 产前诊断例数 确诊总例数a 孕妇高龄b 自愿进行NIPT筛查b 血清学筛查结果异常b 错过血清学筛查时间b 其他NIPT筛查指征b 二胎妊娠b
21-TS高风险 72 67(93.06) 48(71.64) 9(13.43) 9(13.43) 0(0) 1(1.49) 13(19.40)
18-TS高风险 20 18(90.00) 7(38.89) 8(44.44) 2(11.11) 1(5.56) 0(0) 2(11.11)
13-TS高风险 9 8(88.89) 2(25.00) 5(62.50) 0(0) 0(0) 1(12.50) 1(12.50)
SCA 126 70(55.56) 39(55.71) 21(30.00) 5(7.14) 4(5.71) 1(1.43) 18(25.71)
胎儿其他染色体异常 71 23(32.40) 8(34.78) 10(43.48) 0(0) 1(4.35) 4(17.39) 7(30.43)
合计 298 186(62.42) 104(55.91) 53(28.49) 16(8.60) 6(3.23) 7(3.76) 41(22.04)
[1]
Yue W, Zhang E, Liu R, et al. The China birth cohort study (CBCS)[J]. Eur J Epidemiol, 2022, 37(3): 295-304. DOI: 10.1007/s10654-021-00831-8.
[2]
司艳梅，孔元原. 出生缺陷筛查及诊断[J]. 中国临床医生杂志，2020, 48(7): 757-760. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-8552.2020.07.001.
[3]
中华医学会医学遗传学分会临床遗传学组，中国医师协会医学遗传医师分会遗传病产前诊断专业委员会，中华预防医学会出生缺陷预防与控制专业委员会遗传病防控学组. 低深度全基因组测序技术在产前诊断中的应用专家共识[J]. 中华医学遗传学杂志，2019, 36(4): 293-296. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1003-9406.2019.04.001.
[4]
孙丽雅，邢清和，贺林，等. 中国出生缺陷遗传学研究的回顾与展望[J]. 遗传，2018, 40(10): 800-813. DOI: 10.16288/j.yczz.18-181.
[5]
Alldred SK, Takwoingi Y, Guo B, et al. First and second trimester serum tests with and without first trimester ultrasound tests for Down′s syndrome screening[J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2017, 3(3): CD012599. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012599.
[6]
刘春燕，何斌，韩代文，等. 中孕期唐氏综合征血清学筛查在高龄孕妇中的应用价值探讨[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2016, 12(2): 159-163. DOI: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2016.02.006.
[7]
Committee on Practice Bulletins-Obstetrics, Committee on Genetics, and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Practice bulletin No.163: screening for fetal aneuploidy[J]. Obstet Gynecol, 2016, 127(5): e123-e137. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000001406.
[8]
Balslev-Harder M, Richter SR, Kjærgaard S, et al. Correlation between Z score, fetal fraction, and sequencing reads in non-invasive prenatal testing[J]. Prenat Diagn, 2017, 37(9): 943-945. DOI: 10.1002/pd.5116.
[9]
Lo YM, Corbetta N, Chamberlain PF, et al. Presence of fetal DNA in maternal plasma and serum[J]. Lancet, 1997, 350(9076): 485-487. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(97)02174-0.
[10]
Gregg AR, Skotko BG, Benkendorf JL, et al. Noninvasive prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidy, 2016 update: a position statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics[J]. Genet Med, 2016, 18(10): 1056-1065. DOI: 10.1038/gim.2016.97.
[11]
张彦春，刘凯波，张雯，等. 中孕期血清学筛查联合无创产前检测在唐氏综合征产前筛查与诊断中的应用[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2020, 16(6): 709-713. DOI: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2020.06.013.
[12]
张莉，张玉萍，朱镭，等. NIPT作为序贯筛查在胎儿染色体非整倍体筛查中的应用[J]. 中国优生与遗传杂志，2018, 26(11): 39-41. DOI: 10.13404/j.cnki.cjbhh.2018.11.013.
[13]
Chen Y, Yu Q, Mao X, et al. Noninvasive prenatal testing for chromosome aneuploidies and subchromosomal microdeletions/microduplications in a cohort of 42, 910 single pregnancies with different clinical features[J]. Hum Genomics, 2019, 13(1): 60. DOI: 10.1186/s40246-019-0250-2.
[14]
Shaw J, Scotchman E, Chandler N, et al. Preimplantation genetic testing: non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy, copynumber variants and single-gene disorders[J]. Reproduction, 2020, 160(5): A1-A11. DOI: 10.1530/REP-19-0591.
[15]
Du Y, Lin J, Lan L, et al. Detection of chromosome abnormalities using current noninvasive prenatal testing: a multi-center comparative study[J]. Biosci Trends, 2018, 12(3): 327-324. DOI: 10.5582/bst.2018.01044.
[16]
余宏盛，胡晞江. 基于高通量测序技术应用于孕期无创产前筛查人群的结果分析[J]. 实用医学杂志，2019, 35(3): 433-436. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-5725.2019.03.022.
[17]
索峰，张燕，王亿，等. 无创产前检测技术筛查胎儿性染色体非整倍体的临床价值[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2020, 16(5): 584-589. DOI: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2020.05.012.
[18]
赵晓曦，武艾宁，于荣鑫，等. 内蒙古自治区无创产前基因检测高危孕妇的染色体异常状况分析[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2018, 14(2): 224-229. DOI: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2018.02.016.
[1] 戴飞, 赵博文, 潘美, 彭晓慧, 陈冉, 田园诗, 狄敏. 胎儿心脏超声定量多参数对主动脉缩窄胎儿心脏结构及功能的诊断价值[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志（电子版）, 2024, 21(10): 950-958.
[2] 杨忠, 时敬业, 邓学东, 姜纬, 殷林亮, 潘琦, 梁泓, 马建芳, 王珍奇, 张俊, 董姗姗. 产前超声在胎儿22q11.2 微缺失综合征中的应用价值[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志（电子版）, 2024, 21(09): 852-858.
[3] 杜祖升, 赵博文, 张帧, 潘美, 彭晓慧, 陈冉, 毛彦恺. 应用二维斑点追踪成像技术评估孕周及心尖方向对中晚孕期正常胎儿左心房应变的影响[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志（电子版）, 2024, 21(09): 843-851.
[4] 张商迪, 赵博文, 潘美, 彭晓慧, 陈冉, 毛彦恺, 陈阳, 袁华, 陈燕. 中晚孕期胎儿心房内径定量评估心房比例失调胎儿心脏畸形的价值[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志（电子版）, 2024, 21(08): 785-793.
[5] 顾莉莉, 姜凡. 安徽省超声产前筛查切面图像质量现状调查情况及分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志（电子版）, 2024, 21(07): 671-674.
[6] 王秋莲, 张莹, 李春敏, 徐树明, 张玉奇. 胎儿主动脉弓部梗阻伴发复杂心内畸形的产前超声诊断及漏误诊分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志（电子版）, 2024, 21(07): 718-725.
[7] 曾晴, 文华轩, 袁鹰, 廖伊梅, 秦越, 罗丹丹, 梁美玲, 李胜利. 经腹二维超声评价胎儿大脑外侧裂的新参数——外侧裂平台角度[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志（电子版）, 2024, 21(05): 454-459.
[8] 王水清, 赵博文, 潘美, 彭晓慧, 陈冉, 马明明, 狄敏. 16~40周正常胎儿左心房后间隙指数及其Z评分的定量研究[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志（电子版）, 2024, 21(05): 460-469.
[9] 罗刚, 泮思林, 孙玲玉, 李志新, 陈涛涛, 乔思波, 庞善臣. 一种新型语义网络分析模型对室间隔完整型肺动脉闭锁和危重肺动脉瓣狭窄胎儿右心发育不良程度的评价作用[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志（电子版）, 2024, 21(04): 377-383.
[10] 王濛, 王華麟, 王鉴, 孙锟. 先天性心脏病宫内诊疗现状与展望[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(05): 481-485.
[11] 钱警语, 郑明明. 《2024意大利妇产科学会非侵入性和侵入性产前诊断指南》解读[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(05): 486-492.
[12] 黄蓉, 梁自毓, 祁文瑾. NLRP3炎症小体在胎膜早破孕妇血清中的表达及其意义[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(05): 540-548.
[13] 何霞, 黄蓉, 祁文瑾. 胎膜早破孕妇胎盘与胎膜菌群丰度的高通量测序研究[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(05): 549-555.
[14] 谢江燕, 王亚菲, 贺芳. 妊娠合并血栓性血小板减少性紫癜2例并文献复习[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(05): 556-563.
[15] 徐婷婷, 詹泳池, 王晓东, 刘兴会. 电子胎心监测结果出现正弦波形的胎母输血综合征围生期结局分析[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(04): 382-389.
阅读次数
全文


摘要

版权所有 中华医学会 中华医学电子音像出版社有限责任公司  京ICP备14006079号-1  网络出版服务许可证：(署)网出证(京)字第075号

AI
小
编
AI小编
你好！我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编，有什么可以帮您的吗？