Objective: We evaluated the medical-sociological implications of parental perception of risk and decision-making choices for prenatally ascertained choroid plexus cysts (CPCs) between two obstetric populations with similar clinical situations. Methods: The Wayne State University (WSU) Reproductive Genetics database and the Madigan Army Medical Center (MAMC) experience were reviewed to compare the rates of aneuploidy and invasive testing for cases with CPC. Aneuploidy rates were compared between those with isolated CPC, CPC with advanced maternal age (AMA), and CPC associated with multiple anomalies. Results: 186 cases were identified in the WSU cohort, of whom 27 (15%) declined invasive fetal testing. In the remaining 159 cases, aneuploidy was present in 2/132 (1.5%) isolated CPCs, 3/11 (27%) CPCs with AMA, and 15/16 (93%) CPCs with multiple anomalies. 107 cases were identified in the MAMC cohort, of whom 99 (92%) declined invasive fetal testing. No cases of aneuploidy were found in the 3/12 AMA cases or 5/95 non-AMA cases who underwent amniocentesis. Conclusions: The 2 cases of aneuploidy with isolated CPC cannot be ignored, and provide an estimated attributable risk of at least 0.8%, a higher risk than 38 years of age. However, the parental sociologic context may be as important as the genetic-prognostic risk for decision-making.

Keywords:
Choroid plexus cyst, Fetal aneuploidy testing, Parental decisions, Management of fetal malformations
This content is only available via PDF.
© 2000 S. Karger AG, Basel
2000
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.