Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Impact of Fetal Echocardiography on the Prevalence of Liveborn Congenital Heart Disease

  • Published:
Pediatric Cardiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Fetal echocardiography allows for early detection of congenital heart disease, and pregnancy termination may be an option in cases of complex defects. In the current study, the most important factors contributing to the diagnosis and termination of affected pregnancies are reviewed and their combined effect on the future prevalence of liveborn congenital heart disease is evaluated. The relative reduction of the prevalence of the most severe forms of congenital heart disease is estimated as the product of the probability that (1) a fetal cardiac screening is performed (p evaluation), (2) an affected pregnancy is detected (P detection), (3) pregnancy termination is decided following antenatal diagnosis (P decision). In areas where termination of pregnancy is a realistic and supported option, a universal sonographic screening of all pregnancies (P evaluation = 1), with an average reported sensitivity of 35% and a termination rate of 43% following antenatal diagnosis, would result in a 15% overall reduction of the prevalence of the most severe forms of congenital heart disease. However, wide variability exists regarding the defect-specific estimates (2–50% prevalence relative reduction) due to considerable differences in the reported diagnostic sensitivity and termination rates associated with each heart defect. If an earlier diagnosis could be achieved, which is reported to be associated with an average 1.4-fold increased probability of termination, the overall reduction of the prevalence of congenital heart disease could approach 21%. As the skills of obstetric and pediatric cardiology sonographers improve, fetal echocardiography is expected to have a substantial impact on the future epidemiology of liveborn congenital heart disease.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. ACOG Committee on Practice Bulletins (2004) AGOG practice bulletin No 58. Ultrasonography in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 58:1449–1458

    Google Scholar 

  2. Allan LD (2003) Cardiac anatomy screening: what is the best time for screening in pregnancy? Curr Opin Obset Gynecol 15:143–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Allan LD, Apfel HD, Printz BF (1998) Outcome after prenatal diagnosis of the hypoplastic left heart syndrome. Heart 79:371–373

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Allan LD, Cook A, Sullivan I, Sharland GK (1991) Hypoplastic left heart syndrome: effects of fetal echocardiography on birth prevalence. Lancet 127:959–961

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Allan LD, Huggon IC (2004) Counselling following a diagnosis of congenital heart disease. Prenat Diagn 24:1136–1142

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Allan LD, Sharland GK (2001) The echocardiographic diagnosis of totally anomalous pulmonary venous connection in the fetus. Heart 85:433–437

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Allan LD, Sharland GK, Milburn A, et al. (1994) Prospective diagnosis of 1,006 consecutive cases of congenital heart disease in the fetus. J Am Coll Cardial 23:1452–1458

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Ayme S, Morichon N, Goujard J, Nisand I (1997) Prenatal diagnosis in France. Eur J Hum Genet 5(S1):26–31

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bleyer WA (1990) The impact of childhood cancer on the United States and the world. Cancer J Clin 40:354–367

    Google Scholar 

  10. Brackley KJ, Kilby MD, Wright JG, et al. (2000) Outcome after prenatal diagnosis of hypoplastic left-heart syndrome: a case series. Lancet 356:1143–1147

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Brick DH, Allan LD (2002) Outcome of prenatally diagnosed congenital heart disease: an update. Pediatr Cardiol 23:449–453

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Bull C (1999) Current and potential impact of fetal diagnosis on prevalence and spectrum of serious congenital heart disease at term in the UK. British Paediatric Cardiac Association. Lancet 354:1242–1247

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Buskens E, Steyerberg EW, Hess J, Wladimiroff JW, Grobbee DE (1997) Routine prenatal screening for congenital heart disease: what can be expected? A decision-analytic approach. Am J Public Health 87:962–967

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Ewigman BG, Crane JP, Frigoletto FD, et al. (1993) Effect of prenatal ultrasound screening on perinatal outcome. RADIUS Study Group. N Engl J Med 329:821–827

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Ferencz C, Rubin JD, McCarter RJ, et al. (1985) Congenital heart disease: prevalence at livebirth. The Baltimore-Washington Infant Study. Am J Epidemiol 121:31–36

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Fesslova V, Nava S, Villa L (1999) Evolution and long term outcome in cases with fetal diagnosis of congenital heart disease: Italian multicentre study. Fetal Cardiology Study Group of the Italian Society of Pediatric Cardiology. Heart 52:594–599

    Google Scholar 

  17. Garne E, Stoll C, Clementi M, Euro scan Group (2001) Evaluation of prenatal diagnosis of congenital heart diseases by ultrasound: experience from 20 European registries. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 17:386–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Grandjean H, Larroque D, Levi S (1999) The performance of routine ultrasonographic screening of pregnancies in the Eurofetus Study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 181:446–454

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Huggon IC, Ghi T, Cook AC, et al. (2002) Fetal cardiac abnormalities identified prior to 14 weeks’ gestation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 20:22–29

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Huggon IC, Turan O, Allan LD (2004) Doppler assessment of cardiac function at 11–14 weeks’ gestation in fetuses with normal and increased nuchal translucency. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 24:390–398

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (2006) Cardiac screening examination of the fetus: guidelines for performing the “basic” and “extended scan” cardiac scan. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 27:107–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Jaeggi ET, Sholler GF, Jones OD, Cooper SG (2001) Comparative analysis of pattern, management and outcome of pre- versus postnatally diagnosed major congenital heart disease: a population-based study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 77:380–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Julian-Reynier C, Philip N, Scheiner C, et al. (1994) Impact of prenatal diagnosis by ultrasound on the prevalence of congenital anomalies at birth in southern France. J Epidemiol Community Health 48:290–296

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Kenyon SL, Hackett GA, Campbell S (1988) Termination of pregnancy following diagnosis of fetal malformation: the need for improved follow-up services. Clin Obstet Gynecol 57:97–100

    Google Scholar 

  25. Khoshnood B, De Vigan C, Vodovar V, et al. (2005) Trends in prenatal diagnosis, pregnancy termination, and perinatal mortality of newborns with congenital heart disease in France. 1983–2000: a population based evaluation. Pediatrics 115:95–101

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Luck CA (1992) Value of routine ultrasound scanning at 19 weeks: a four year study of 8849 deliveries. Br Med J 304:1474–1478

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Meyer-Wittkopf M, Cooper S, Sholler G (2001) Correlation between fetal cardiac diagnosis by obstetric and pediatric cardiologist sonographers and comparison with postnatal findings. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 77:392–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Montana E, Klioury MJ, Cragan JD, et al. (1996) Trends and outcomes after prenatal diagnosis of congenital cardiac malformations by fetal echocardiography in a well defined birth population. Atlanta, Georgia, 1990–1994. J Am Coll Cardiol 28:1805–1809

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. National Collaborating Centre for Women’s and Children’s Health (2003) Commissioned by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Antenatal care: routine care for the healthy pregnant woman. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Clinical Guideline No. 213280

    Google Scholar 

  30. Renaud M, Bouchard L, Kremp O, et al. (1993) Is selective abortion for a genetic disease an issue for the medical profession? A comparative study of Quebec and France. Prenat Diagn 13:691–706

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Rychik J, Ayres N, Cuneo B, et al. (2004) American Society of Echocardiography guidelines and standards for performance of the fetal echocardiogram. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 17:803–810

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Sclimidt KG, deAraujo L, Silverman NH (1998) Evaluation of structural and functional abnormalities of the fetal heart by echocardiography. Am J Cardiac Imaging 2:57–76

    Google Scholar 

  33. Sklansky M, Shauglinessy R, Lucas V, Kashani I, Rothman A (2000) A comparison of fetal echocardiography in university and health maintenance organization settings. Pediatr Cardiol 27:234–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Smythe JF, Copel JA, Kleinman CS (1992) Outcome of prenatally detected cardiac malformations. Am J Cardiol 69:1471–1474

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Stumpflen I, Stumpflen A, Wimmer M, Bernaschek G (1996) Effect of detailed fetal echocardiography as part of routine prenatal ultrasonographic screening on detection of congenital heart disease. Lancet 348:854–857

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Tworetzky W, McElhinney DB, Reddy VM, et al. (2001) Improved surgical outcome after fetal diagnosis of hypoplastic left heart syndrome. Circulation 703:1269–1273

    Google Scholar 

  37. Verheijen PM, Lisowski LA, Stoutenbeek P, et al. (2001) Prenatal diagnosis of congenital heart disease affects preoperative acidosis in the newborn patient. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 12:798–803

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Zimmer EZ, Avraham Z, Sujoy P, Goldstein I, Bronshtein M (1997) The influence of prenatal ultrasound on the prevalence of congenital anomalies at birth. Prenat Diagn 17:623–628

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pediatrics, Pediatric Cardiology Unit, University Hospital of Heraklion, 71201 Voutes–Heraklion, Crete, Greece

    Ioannis Germanakis

  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maternal Fetal Medicine Unit, University Hospital of Heraklion, 71201 Voutes–Heraklion, Crete, Greece

    Stavros Sifakis

Authors
  1. Ioannis Germanakis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stavros Sifakis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ioannis Germanakis.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Germanakis, I., Sifakis, S. The Impact of Fetal Echocardiography on the Prevalence of Liveborn Congenital Heart Disease. Pediatr Cardiol 27, 465–472 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00246-006-1291-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00246-006-1291-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation