Skip to content

Prenatal diagnosis: MLPA and/or karyotyping

Prenatal diagnosis: MLPA and/or karyotyping - MLPA And Karyptyping, an Evaluation (M.A.K.E.)

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
NL-OMON
Registry ID
NL-OMON30149
Enrollment
4500
Registered
2007-11-13
Start date
2006-12-01
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2024-06-18

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Down Syndrome trisomy 13/18/21/XY

Interventions

None listed

Sponsors

Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Age
18 Years to 99 Years

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: pregnant women undergoing amniocentesis the referral indication for amniocentesis is: 1)advanced maternal age, 2) increased risk after prenatal screening tests informed consent is given

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: patients with other referral indications, e.g. ultrasound abnormalities, previous child with chromosomal berration, structural balanced chromosome aberration of one of the parents. language barrier

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Diagnostic accuracy is assessed through a blind comparison of MLPA against the accepted gold standard (TKT)in a clinical setting. Sensitivity and specificity are calculated and discordant test results are recorded. Technical performance including technical difficulties (i.e. equipment malfunction)and missing or inconclusive results are recorded, as well as missing results due to lack of amniotic fluid. Turnaround time for laboratory processing and availability of test results of MLPA versus TKT, known at laboratory level and patientlevel are recorded.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
1. Anxiety and distress as secondary outcome will be measured by available standardized questionnaires (STAI, PPC, IES, MOS-SF)which also have been used for similar studies(PhD Thesis Muller, 2006 in press; screening for irregular erythrocyte antibodies in pregnancy]. 2. Cost as secondary outcome will focus on medical costs (including implementation and quality control). If relevant the cost-effectiveness of TKT over MLPA will be calculated. 3. Using acommercially available kit(i.e.P095), trisomy 13, 18, 21 and sexchromosome abnormalities will be detected. Firstly, we will focus on detecting trisomy 21 and secondly, chromosomes 13 18, X and Y. The latter can be of uncertain clinical relevance and cause counselling difficulties. A panel will assess these findings and will judge whether they are clinically relevant, irrelevant or of uncertain relevance. This might result in excluding/including probes from/into the MLPA aneuploidy kit in future testing. Differences inemerging unexpected or incomprehensible findings will be described qualitatively taking advantage of a recent study on this issue [VanZwieten,2004]. 4. A standard patientpreference study (so called discrete choice evaluation)will allow quantification of the balance of all (dis)advantages of either test[Ryan,2005].

Countries

Netherlands

Outcome results

None listed

Source: NL-OMON (via WHO ICTRP)