Forum Index
»
Expectant and Postpartum Moms
NT test?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
I was 40 when pg and had the nuchal and the quad screen - all with good results (the numbers on the nuchal especially were very positive). At my doctor's advice, I went ahead and had the amnio. Although I felt very confident after the various screens, especially the nuchal, I was AMAZED at how relieved I felt after the amnio test results came back. At some level, my mind knew the difference between a screening and a test. It took the test for me really to embrace the joy. Best wishes to you, OP! |
Anonymous
| I had my CVS done by Dr. Pinckert (in Rockville) and was told by the practice's genetic counselor that their miscarriage rate is 1/400. That is MUCH better than the national average quoted for CVS and better, I believe, than the national amnio average too. I really liked Dr. Pinckert. And, it was a huge relief to hear that all 46 chromosomes were normal; to me, the certainty is worth a lot. |
Anonymous
|
OP, you should be able to get some insight into the NT measurement at the sonogram, although I'm sure it depends on where you get it done. I had both of mine done at Georgetown, and the tech told me both times that the measurement was very good (I think under 3 mm is what you want? not 100% sure). They also looked for the nasal bone (absence is a DS marker) and did an anatomy scan to look for other markers and abnormalities. So I left the US feeling good.
I got the actual odds ratios a week later when the bloodwork came back. THe second time, the odds for DS were slightly higher than my age-based odds (and much higher than the 1:5000 I had in my first pg), so I spoke with the genetic counselor at length. She confirmed that the bloodwork raised the odds and that the nuchal measurement is a more reliable indicator, which made me feel much better. I still decided to have the amnio (at 16 weeks) for peace of mind. But I'm a fairly high-stress person, and I felt very confident coming out the NT, even with the higher-than-expected odds, that everything was OK. |
Anonymous
| I'm 40 and decided not to have the screening test and go straight for the CVS. I had it done at Genetics and IVF in Fairfax and Dr. Stern was great. They have very low miscarriage rates there. I got the results back in a week and it was such a huge relief to know that everything is okay. It was also a bonus to find out the sex at 13 weeks. At my 20 week ultrasound, they found two choroid plexus cysts on my baby's brain and said that they would be very concerned about this being a marker for Downs Syndrome had I not had the CVS. So the CVS really saved me a tremendous amount of worry. I would do it again if I have a second child. |
Anonymous
OP, I had the NT at Greater Washington Maternal & Fetal Health (or is it Fetal & Maternal)--offices at Holy Cross and near Shady Grove. I was able to go in a week or two ahead (call and ask) and do the bloodwork, so that when I went in for the U/S piece of it, they were able to tell us the results immediately, i.e., the doc came in and handed us the paper and told us everything looked great. I was 41 when I delivered, and the results of the NT put our risk of DS at the same odds as a 25-year-old. We decided that was good enough and didn't have the amnio. I had miscarried the first, so we were greatly relieved--and have a beautiful 13-month-old son now. Good luck to you! |
Anonymous
| I don't know if anyone has mentioned this, but some OBs are offering a sequential nuchal, which offers more accurate results. I believe the accuracy of the first nuchal is about 85%, and with the sequential it's about 95%. The first blood draw and sono are at around 13 weeks, the second at around 16 weeks. This might be a middle ground that you could consider, OP. I just got the results from my sequential and the numbers were so good that I'm feeling okay about it, even though I did have one marker. |
Anonymous
| Interesting info, PP. Perhaps things have changed since I was pregnant (which wasn't all that long ago, DD is 11 months), but at the time the latest the NT test could be done was 13w6d. In fact I ended up having it done around 13w3d due to some last minute schedule change, and the tech mentioned something about being very close to the cutoff. Having it at 16 weeks wouldn't have been an option. If you want an additional level of security without having an invasive procedure, you can have the triple/quad screen done around 16/18 weeks, which is just a blood draw, but I think the results for those are less reliable than the NT. |
efeldman
Member Offline
Member Offline
|
The nuchal translucency test involves 2 blood tests and an amnio at about 12 weeks. Then there is an additional blood test at 16 weeks. It is definitely not 100%. The false positive rate increases as the optimal time is missed. It cannot tell you gender. I had this done and then ended up having an amnio at 20 weeks because of something else they saw on the ultrasound at 20 weeks. Chorionic villous sampling is done at 12 weeks and amnio at about 16 weeks.
The best place to have actual procedures done is at a high-risk office like a maternal-fetal medicine specialist. They use ultrasound for the amnio which increases the safety profile a great deal. Also, if you stick yourself in bed for around 48 hours after the amnio the risk of miscarriage decreases a fair amount. Also minimizing constipation and avoiding sneezing/coughing around the same time. At 39, your risk of Down's is higher than your prior pregnancy. You have to way the risks of the procedure and info you wish to have. And are you going to do anything different with that info. |
Anonymous
Sorry to belabor the point, but this information is incorrect. The NT test involves an ultrasound and a blood test (only 1). If you had an additional blood test at 16 weeks, it was probably a triple/quad screen and not a part of NT. Also, the NT most definitely does NOT involve an amnio, the whole point of the NT test is to have a non-invasive procedure that screens for risks. See here for example http://www.babycenter.com/0_nuchal-translucency-screening_118.bc. |
Anonymous
| Just to clarify, the NT test is usually part of the triple screen or quadruple screen. The first 2 blood tests (one blood draw) are done at about the same time as the ultrasound. The ultrasound alone is not very specific or sensitive. The AFP test drawn at 16 weeks increases the value of the test even more. |
Anonymous
| PP 10:47 is correct. 11:46, any subsequent blood test at 16 weeks is not part of the NT. |
Anonymous
|
And the NT is completely separate from the triple or quad screen. It is not a part of it.
This thread just proves that there is a lot of misinformation out there! http://www.americanpregnancy.org/prenataltesting/firstscreen.html |
Anonymous
We did the same thing at Genetics & IVF in Fairfax. I went a week ahead to have blood drawn so the results of that part of the NT test were ready and waiting when we came back for the u/s part. It was great because there was no waiting involved after the u/s. That said, we then went ahead and did a CVS the same day. Althought the NT odds looked good, we realized we wanted more certainty. Next time we'll go straight to the CVS. Anyway, Dr. Stern was terrific -- highly recommend Genetics & IVF. They (like some other places in this area) are so experienced that their stats are far better than the national average. Good luck to you! |
Anonymous
|
Wow, I feel like the only one lately (friends, this post) who isn't trying to get every test possible. It's been interesting (for me) to see/think about my reactions. I'm older for this pregnancy (will be 36 when deliver) than I was for the first (34) but not by much. Anyway, I did the test for Downs and Trisomy 13 and 18 (can't recall, is that NT?) and things looked good according to the doctor. But they offered a number of other tests, and an amnio due to a possible problem found in the second ultrasound. I decided that it wouldn't change my mind on the delivery (whether to have the child - heck, not even sure that's a choice at 20 weeks?) so I didn't want to worry myself more. Granted, I'm a little stressed about the "issue" that they found, even though the doctor said the problem usually goes away by 26 weeks, especially since my Downs and trisomy tests looked good. Bottom line for me was that even though I am staunchly pro-choice, I knew I personally couldn't terminate this baby so did I really want to have all the info in the world that could potentially make me just stress out over the next 20 weeks? Granted if all looked good, it would be reassuring, but still, it could come back with bad news in which case I'd be obsessing over the baby, obsessing over everything I did or ate or whatever.
If your results came back/come back with bad news, what's the next step? Here's to healthy kiddos! |
Anonymous
| I had a NT which showed the odds for Downs as 1 in 4,300 so we decided not to have an amnio. If the risk for a miscarriage with the amnio is 1 in 250-400 (different studies quote different numbers), then I figured the risk of a miscarriage was significantly higher than the probability of having a child with downs based on 1 in 4,300 risk. i also had the quad test, which involves another test at 16 weeks, and a level II sonogram at 20 weeks. Based on all those results, we decided not to have an amnio. For us, whether or not to have an amnio, was based on the NT test results. Hope that helps. There's no right or wrong decision about the NT vs. amnio, it's whatever you most comfortable with. |