Skip to content

Which is the most cost-efficient paradigm of early screening for fetal congenital abnormalities?

Which is the most cost-efficient paradigm of early screening for fetal congenital abnormalities? - First trimester screening

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
NL-OMON
Registry ID
NL-OMON48336
Enrollment
2235
Registered
2019-05-21
Start date
2019-05-01
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2024-04-15

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

Conditions

congenital anomalies Congenital chromosomal anomalies

Interventions

Patients will be asked to participate into the study and, if consent is obtained, they will be allocated to one of two different care models: A) US scan at 10 weeks followed by NIPT (care as usual)

Sponsors

Universitair Medisch Centrum Groningen
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Age
18 Years to 99 Years

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Women with singleton pregnancies who choose for NIPT as first trimester screening test will be included in the study. In order to be included women need to give informed consent by signing a written informed-consent form. Ultrasound practicing using Astraia software for data registration will be included.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Women younger than 18 years and incapacitated persons will be excluded from the study.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Identify in how many NIPT tests were unable to provide a conclusive result in study arm A versus B. Inconclusive NIPT results/ no results are defined as of the following: *NIPT cannot be performed because of spontaneous fetal loss diagnosed at ultrasound examination *NIPT is correctly performed but gives an inconclusive result *NIPT is not performed because of exclusion criteria identified at ultrasound examination

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
The secondary objectives are to: * Identify the proportion of TOPs in strategies A and B * Identify the timing of termination of pregnancy in fetuses with congenital abnormalities in group A versus group B; OR timing of definitive diagnosis of anomaly in case of test-positive ultrasound result * Investigate whether a difference in dating of the pregnancy exists if the CRL is measured at 10 weeks or at 12-13 weeks gestation * Investigate patient*s preferences for strategies A and B * Identify the most cost-effective screening strategy * Sensitivity and specificity of strategies A and B

Countries

Netherlands

Outcome results

None listed

Source: NL-OMON (via WHO ICTRP)