Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Impact of prenatal screening on congenital heart defects in neonates with Down syndrome in the US

Abstract

Background

Non-invasive prenatal screening (NIPS) has fundamentally changed the screening process for Down syndrome (DS). Rates of complex congenital heart defects (CHD) have decreased in international studies but whether these shifts exist in the US is unknown.

Methods

Encounters for neonates with DS from 2007 to 2018 were obtained from the Pediatric Health Information System database. CHD were categorized as complex CHD, atrioventricular septal defects (AVSD), ventricular septal defects (VSD), and tetralogy of Fallot (TOF). Comparisons were made between pre-NIPS era (2007–2010) vs. post-NIPS era (2014–2018) and between states with low vs. high access to pregnancy termination as described by the Guttmacher Institute.

Results

Among 9122 patients, 6% had complex CHD, 22% had an AVSD, 22% had a VSD, and 4% had TOF. No difference in proportions of CHD was seen between eras. A small difference was observed in the proportion of AVSD between states with low vs. high access to pregnancy termination (23 vs. 17%, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

The proportion of CHD in patients with DS appears to be stable despite widespread adoption of NIPS in the US. Variations were observed between states with low vs. high access to pregnancy termination. Population based studies are needed to fully evaluate the current epidemiology of CHD in DS.

Impact

  • Through investigation of the Pediatric Health Information System database, this study assesses contemporary epidemiology of congenital heart disease among patients with Down syndrome.

  • It has been suggested that improved prenatal screening for Down syndrome has altered the cardiac phenotype in international populations. Whether a similar shift also exists in the United States is unknown.

  • In a contemporary United States cohort, a shift in the proportion or type of heart defects over the past decade was not observed. Regional differences in the proportion of heart defects were seen and may be due to differential access to prenatal care.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1: Proportions of neonates with Down syndrome with congenital heart defects by year.
Fig. 2: Proportions of neonates with Down syndrome with congenital heart defects among states with low pregnancy termination access and high pregnancy termination access.

References

  1. 1.

    de Graaf, G., Buckley, F. & Skotko, B. G. Estimates of the live births, natural losses, and elective terminations with Down syndrome in the United States. Am. J. Med. Genet. A 167, 756–767 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Källén, B., Mastroiacovo, P. & Robert, E. Major congenital malformations in Down syndrome. Am. J. Med. Genet. 65, 160–166 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Fudge, J. C. et al. Congenital heart surgery outcomes in Down syndrome: analysis of a national clinical database. Pediatrics 126, 315–322 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Stoll, C., Dott, B., Alembik, Y. & Roth, M.-P. Associated congenital anomalies among cases with Down syndrome. Eur. J. Med. Genet. 58, 674–680 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Cua, C. L., Haque, U., Santoro, S., Nicholson, L. & Backes, C. H. Differences in mortality characteristics in neonates with Down’s syndrome. J. Perinatol. 37, 427–431 (2017).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Derrington, T. M. et al. Racial/ethnic differences in hospital use and cost among a statewide population of children with down syndrome. Res. Dev. Disabil. 34, 3276–3287 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Practice Bulletin No. 163: screening for fetal aneuploidy. Obstet. Gynecol. 127, e123–e137 (2016).

  8. 8.

    Cocchi, G. et al. International trends of Down syndrome 1993-2004: births in relation to maternal age and terminations of pregnancies. Birth Defects Res. A Clin. Mol. Teratol. 88, 474–479 (2010).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Jackson, J. M., Druschel, C. M. & Shapira, S. K. Expanding diagnostic testing beyond cytogenetics: implications for birth defects research and surveillance. Birth Defects Res. A Clin. Mol. Teratol. 97, 726 (2013).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Rink, B. D. & Norton, M. E. Screening for fetal aneuploidy. Semin. Perinatol. 40, 35–43 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Haymon, L., Simi, E., Moyer, K., Aufox, S. & Ouyang, D. W. Clinical implementation of noninvasive prenatal testing among maternal fetal medicine specialists. Prenat. Diagn. 34, 416–423 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Greely, H. T. Get ready for the flood of fetal gene screening. Nature 469, 289–291 (2011).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Palomaki, G. E., Knight, G. J., Ashwood, E. R., Best, R. G. & Haddow, J. E. Screening for down syndrome in the United States: results of surveys in 2011 and 2012. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 137, 921–926 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Norton, M. E. et al. Non-Invasive Chromosomal Evaluation (NICE) study: results of a multicenter prospective cohort study for detection of fetal trisomy 21 and trisomy 18. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 207, 137.e1–137.e8 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Gil, M. M., Quezada, M. S., Revello, R., Akolekar, R. & Nicolaides, K. H. Analysis of cell-free DNA in maternal blood in screening for fetal aneuploidies: updated meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 45, 249–266 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Donofrio, M. T. et al. Diagnosis and treatment of fetal cardiac disease: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 129, 2183–2242 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Hill, M. et al. Has noninvasive prenatal testing impacted termination of pregnancy and live birth rates of infants with Down syndrome? Prenat. Diagn. 37, 1281–1290 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Morris, J. K. et al. Major congenital anomalies in babies born with Down syndrome: a EUROCAT population-based registry study. Am. J. Med. Genet. A 164A, 2979–2986 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Bergstro, M. S. et al. Trends in congenital heart defects in infants with Down syndrome. Pediatrics 138, e20160123 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Riehle-Colarusso, T. & Oster, M. E. Down syndrome: changing cardiac phenotype? Pediatrics 138, e20161223 (2016).

  21. 21.

    Nash, E. Abortion rights in peril—what clinicians need to know. N. Engl. J. Med. 381, 497–499 (2019).

  22. 22.

    Guttmacher Institute. State abortion policy landscape: from hostile to supportive. https://www.guttmacher.org/article/2019/08/state-abortion-policy-landscape-hostile-supportive (2018).

  23. 23.

    Pfitzer, C. et al. Dynamics in prevalence of Down syndrome in children with congenital heart disease. Eur. J. Pediatr. 177, 107–115 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Warsof, S. L., Larion, S. & Abuhamad, A. Z. Overview of the impact of noninvasive prenatal testing on diagnostic procedures. Prenat. Diagn. 35, 972–979 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Skotko, B. G. With new prenatal testing, will babies with Down syndrome slowly disappear? Arch. Dis. Child. 94, 823–826 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

S.A.H. conceptualized and designed the study, interpreted the data analysis, drafted the initial manuscript, and reviewed and revised the manuscript. D.N. conceptualized and designed the study, performed the statistical analysis, interpreted the data analysis, and critically reviewed and revised the manuscript for important intellectual content. C.H.B. interpreted the data analysis and critically reviewed and revised the manuscript for important intellectual content. C.L.C. conceptualized and designed the study, interpreted the data analysis, and critically reviewed and revised the manuscript for important intellectual content. All authors approved the final manuscript as submitted and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephen A. Hart.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Patient consent

Not required.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hart, S.A., Nandi, D., Backes, C.H. et al. Impact of prenatal screening on congenital heart defects in neonates with Down syndrome in the US. Pediatr Res (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41390-021-01416-7

Download citation

Search

Quick links