Journal of Medical Ultrasonics

, Volume 42, Issue 2, pp 195–198 | Cite as

How do the trends in the prenatal diagnosis of aneuploidy change after a non-invasive prenatal test becomes available? A Japanese single center study

  • Junichi HasegawaEmail author
  • Masamitsu Nakamura
  • Akihiko Sekizawa
Original Article



To clarify the trends in the use of the prenatal diagnosis of and screening for aneuploidy after a non-invasive prenatal test (NIPT) was made available at a single Japanese hospital.


The subjects included consecutive pregnant females who visited our hospital for maternal checkups and delivery between January 2012 and April 2014. After the subjects were divided into those who desired a prenatal diagnosis or screening before the availability of NIPT and those who did after the availability of NIPT, the frequencies of various prenatal diagnosis and screening procedures were compared between the two groups.


A total of 544 patients who visited the hospital before NIPT was available and 703 who visited the hospital after NIPT became available were analyzed. While only 16.2 % of pregnant females received a prenatal diagnosis or screening before the NIPT was available, 27.5 % of them considered undergoing a prenatal diagnosis or screening after the NIPT was available before genetic counseling, and 24.0 % ultimately received a prenatal diagnosis or screening following genetic counseling. Of these patients, 7.7 % underwent NIPT. First trimester ultrasound screening for chromosomal abnormalities was unlikely to be selected (from 12.9 to 10.5 %, p = 0.212), although the rate of amniocentesis significantly increased after genetic counseling (from 1.5 to 3.7 %, p = 0.021).


Since NIPT became available in 2013, pregnant females have demonstrated a deep interest in obtaining a prenatal diagnosis and screening. Whereas some patients choose to forgo a screening after receiving genetic counseling, others prefer invasive diagnostic tests in contrast to screening.


Amniocentesis Chorionic villous sampling Chromosomal abnormality Down syndrome First trimester Nuchal translucency Ultrasound 


Conflict of interest

There are no financial or other relationships that could lead to a conflict of interest.

Ethical standards

All procedures were performed in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the 1975 Declaration of Helsinki, as revised in 2008 (5). Informed consent was obtained from all patients included in the study.


  1. 1.
    Yotsumoto J, Sekizawa A, Koide K, et al. Attitudes toward non-invasive prenatal diagnosis among pregnant women and health professionals in Japan. Prenat Diagn. 2012;32:674–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nicolaides KH, Brizot ML, Snijders RJ. Fetal nuchal translucency: ultrasound screening for fetal trisomy in the first trimester of pregnancy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1994;101:782–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wald NJ, George L, Smith D, et al. Serum screening for Down’s syndrome between 8 and 14 weeks of pregnancy. International Prenatal Screening Research Group. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1996;103:407–12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Snijders RJ, Noble P, Sebire N, et al. UK multicentre project on assessment of risk of trisomy 21 by maternal age and fetal nuchal-translucency thickness at 10–14 weeks of gestation. Fetal Medicine Foundation First Trimester Screening Group. Lancet. 1998;352:343–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nicolaides KH. Nuchal translucency and other first-trimester sonographic markers of chromosomal abnormalities. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191:45–67.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nicolaides KH. Some thoughts on the true value of ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2007;30:671–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Malone FD, Canick JA, Ball RH, et al. First-trimester or second-trimester screening, or both, for Down’s syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:2001–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chiu RW, Akolekar R, Zheng YW, et al. Non-invasive prenatal assessment of trisomy 21 by multiplexed maternal plasma DNA sequencing: large scale validity study. BMJ. 2011;342:c7401.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Japan Society of Ultrasonics in Medicine 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Junichi Hasegawa
    • 1
    Email author
  • Masamitsu Nakamura
    • 1
  • Akihiko Sekizawa
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyShowa University School of MedicineTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations