NT test: odds of Down Syndrome 1/2900
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
| I just got my results from my NT scan + blood test. The risk of Down Syndrome is 1/2900. This sounds really good. DH thinks I should skip the amnio because the odds of a miscarriage from the amnio are higher than the baby having Down. But I am still trying to decide whether I want the peace that certainty brings. Has anyone else gone ahead w/ amnio with odds close to mine? I'm 34, so I thought my odds would be significantly worse. |
Anonymous
| Why not do the Materni21 test? That is supposed to be 99% accurate and when that comes back clear, I would think that would provide a darn good level of certainty without any risk to baby. |
Anonymous
|
I never had any extra testing with my babies (I was 27, 29, 32 and 35 when they were born) since I was low risk. Many prenatal tests are inconclusive and we preferred to remain ignorant and it turned out well for us. There is very little that can be done before birth anyway and for us abortion was not an option. I guess that is the question. If you choose to have more testing and it shows a problem, what would your actions be? Abortion or would you really be able to prepare or would it just ruin the pregnancy. I also have a family member and a number of friends that had pregnancies where the tests showed a problem and the baby was born without any. You just have to weigh your options and figure it out for yourself.
|
Anonymous
|
Amnios are risky. It would be silly to do one after such good NT scan and blood test results. As long as you are sure that you took the blood test at the right point in your pregnancy, I'd forget about amnio.
For the same reasons, it doesn't make sense to pay for Materni21. Those tests are offered to high risk individuals. That's not you, OP. |
Anonymous
|
OP here. 11:10, I had the scan and blood test at 12
weeks. |
Anonymous
| This is 11:05...I agree that you don't need the Materni21, but it could give you the peace of mind you need. PP is correct that you are not high risk and you may have to pay out of pocket for the test. AND, the bigger question of whether you would terminate. Regardless, it sounds like baby is just fine! |
jindc
Member Offline
Member Offline
|
according to my doc, per today's appointment with her, M21 isn't FDA approved if you are under 35....so just a heads up.
Good luck with whatever decision you make, but I think you'll be fine. I'm 31 (32 next week) and doc said anything above 1 in 500 was negative. That's what I heard, anyway lol |
Anonymous
| Those are good odds, OP. I mean, if you are carrying a boy, the odds are 1 in something like 54 for autism related disorders according to the CDC. You have a very, very small sliver of a chance of having a baby with DS. |
Anonymous
|
I would not do an amnio with 1/2900 odds. I didn't do an NT scan with my last child but at my anatomy scan there was a soft marker for DS. We then went on to do the quad screen and were given something like 1/750. We did not do the amnio because the risk of miscarriage from amnio was higher than our risk of DS. Also, my age related risk was something like 1/500. So my numbers were better than just the average person my age. My son does not have DS.
With 1/2900 I would never even consider amnio. The risk is so miniscule. |
Anonymous
| Your risk of complication from amnio (1/200-1/400) is higher than the risk of down syndrome. Sounds like a no brainer to me. |
Anonymous
| I personally wouldn't get the amnio - my odds were a little lower than yours and I had the M21 test with good results, so I chose not to do any additional testing. |
Anonymous
Those are not the true odds of m/c, which are much lower today. Labeling amnio as a "risky" procedure is exaggerating the risk. Yes, there is a risk, but most experts agree that it is quite a safe procedure today. The numbers PP quoted are from before they guided the needle with ultrasound. Nonetheless, I agree that I would skip the amnio in OP's situation, especially if your husband isn't on board. If you need more certainty than what your NT test gave you, you should have skipped the screening altogether and gone straight to testing (i.e. CVS or amnio). This is what I did, because I needed a high degree of certainty, and didn't want to be in a situation where I had to decide whether diagnostic testing was justified because my odds had been shown to be pretty low. You decided to do screening and got really good odds that you should be quite comfortable with. If you have changed your mind and are now thinking you need certainty vs. odds, then, of course, you should consider the amnio. However, most people would agree that your odds are low enough to feel comfortable now and just enjoy your pregnancy. Diagnostic testing can add a lot of stress to your life. And the MaterniT21, while a great test to detect the most common trisomies, doesn't give you the same comprehensive results as amnio or CVS, so for someone who wants certainty that their child doesn't have any severe genetic abnormalities it isn't enough either. |
Anonymous
| I would skip the amnio. There are risks, even if small, and the screening doesn't indicate that further testing is needed. Having a baby introduces all kinds of uncertainties into your life--might as well start getting used to that now! |
Anonymous
| You never have absolute certainty. Something can always go wrong - parenthood is a leap into the unknown. Those sound like pretty good odds to me. |
Anonymous
It's not really a no-brainer. The risks are different not only in likelihood, but in character. Some people are more comfortable with the possibility of losing a pregnancy than giving birth to a child with an unexpected chromosomal abnormality. Put another way, some people are willing to trade the small risk of miscarriage from amino for the certainty it brings. These are highly personal decisions. It may be clear cut for you but it's not so simple for everyone. |