Hyperechogenic fetal bowel as a markerof fetal cystic fibrosis


Authors: M. Sukupová 1,2;  I. Dhaifalah 2,3;  Z. Adamík 1;  J. Havalová 1,2
Authors‘ workplace: Gynekologicko-porodnické oddělení, Krajská nemocnice T. Bati, a. s. Zlín, přednosta MUDr. Z. Adamík, Ph. D. 1;  Centrum fetální medicíny a lékařské genetiky, Krajská nemocnice T. Bati, a. s. Zlín vedoucí pracoviště doc. MUDr. I. Dhaifalah, Ph. D. 2;  Ústav lékařské genetiky LF UP, Olomouc, přednostka doc. MUDr. I. Dhaifalah, Ph. D. 3
Published in: Ceska Gynekol 2015; 80(1): 20-24

Overview

Introduction:
Hyperechogenic bowel (HB) occurs in 0.1 to 1.8% of normal pregnancies. In most cases it has no consequence for the foetus, but can be associated with cystic fibrosis (CF), chromosomal defects, genetic syndromes, viral infections, gastrointestinal pathology, missed gravidity, IUGR and preterm labour.

Objectives:
Assessment the risk of the foetus having CF or other abnormalities when HB was detected during ultrasound screening in the second trimester of pregnancy in our centre.

Design:
Retrospective study.

Setting:
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Centre of Fetal Medicine and Genetics, KNTB a.s. Zlín.

Methods:
Retrospective analysis of 149 cases of HB between 17 to 22 weeks of pregnancy detected from January 2008 to April 2012.

HB was evaluated according to its degree of echogenicity (Slotnik/Abuhamed classification), presence or absence of other ultrasound markers and the result of first trimester combined screening result. When stage II or III HB and/or borderline risk in first trimester screening, and presence of other ultrasound markers was detected, amniocentesis (AMC) was performed to investigate the karyotype, mutations in the CFTR gene and presence of viral infections (cytomegalovirus and parvovirus B19). If stage I or II HB and/or negative I. trimester screening and no other ultrasound markers, viral infections and mutations in the CFTR gene were investigated form maternal blood. If positive, paternal blood sampling testing for mutation in the CFTR gene was performed. If a mutation was detected in both parents, AMC was performed.

Mutations of the CFTR gene was investigated with a com-mercial panel of 33 to 50 most common mutations.

Postnatally the outcome of neonatal screening for CF(IRT) and any newborns with congenital malformations were ascertained.

Results:
HB was seen in 149 foetuses, AMC was performed in 94 (63%), and blood sampling in 55 (37%). Two mutations in the CFTR gene associated with a severe form of CF (deltaF508/3849 KBC +10 T) were found in one foetus from the AMC group with stage III HB. The parents decided to terminate the pregnancy.

The incidence of HB in our group was 0.7%. In 4 foetuses (2.7%) with stage II HB heterozygous deltaF508 mutation was found, in the rest no mutations were detected. Parents of heterozygous carriers underwent genetic consultation. Postnatal CF screening (IRT level from a heel prick sample) was negative; therefore no further molecular genetic analysis was performed.

Infection was detected in three foetuses; one case was managed with intrauterine transfusion and in the other two cases parents decided for termination. Four cases (2.7%) were terminated because of severe congenital anomalies. Minor congenital abnormalities were detected in seven (4.7%) cases. Intrauterine death was detected in three (2%) pregnancies.

Conclusion:
Based on our results, HB can be considered as a significant marker for the risk of CF, especially in HB stages II and III. It also demonstrates the importance of this marker for the risk of other foetal abnormalities.

Keywords:
hyperechogenic bowel, cystic fibrosis, mutation, amniocentesis, viral infection, chromosomal abnormalities


Sources

1. Abramowicz, MJ., Dessars, B., Sevens, C., et al. Fetal bowel hyperechogenicity may indicie mild atypical cystic fibrosis: a case associated with a komplex CFTR allele. J Med Genet, 2000, 37 (http://jmedgenet.com/cgi/conent/full/37/8/e15).

2. Balaščáková, M., Piskáčková, T., Holubová, A., a kol. Současné metodické postupy a přehled neimplantační, prenatální a postnatální DNA diagnostiky v České republice. Čes-slov Pediat, 2008, 63, 2, s. 62–75

3. Becdelievre, A., Costa, C., LeFloch, A., et al. Notable contribution of large CFTR gene rearrangements to the diagnosis of cystic fibrosis in fetuses with bowel anomalies. Eur J Hum Genet, 2010, 18, p. 1166–1169.

4. Ghose, I., Mason, GC., Martinez, D., et al. Hyperechogenic fetal bowel: a prospective analysis of sixty consecutive cases. Brit J Obstet Gynecol, 2000, 107, p. 426–429.

5. Jouannic, JM., Gavard, L., Criquat, J., et al. Isolated fetal hyperechogenic bowel associated with intra-uterine parvovirus B19 infection. Fetal Diagnosis Ther, 2005, 20(6), p. 498–500.

6. Markus-Soekarman, D., Offermans, J., Van den Ouwe-land, AM., et al. Hyperechogenic fetal bowel: counseting difficulties. Eur J Med Genet, 2005, 48(4), p. 421–425.

7. Muller, F., Dommergues, M., Simon-Bouy, B., et al. Cystic fibrosis screening: a fetus with hyperechogenic bowel may be the index case. Medical Genet, 1998, 35, p. 657–660.

8. Muller, F., Simon-Bouy, B., Girodon, E., et al. Predicting the risk of cystic fibrosis with abnormal ultrasound signs of fetal bowel. Amer J Medical Genet, 2002, p. 109–115.

9. Rowe, SM., Miller, S., Sorscher, E., et al. Mechanisms of disease cystic fibrosis, review article. New Engl J Med, 2005, 5, p. 1992–2005.

10. Ruiz, MJ., Thatch, KA., Fisher, JC., et al. Neonatal outcomes associated with intestinal abnormalities diagnosed by fetal ultrasound. J Pediatric Surg, 2009, 4, p. 71–75.

11. Sepulveda, W., Nicolaides, P., Mai, AT. Is isolated second-trimester hyperechogenic bowel a predictor of suboptimal fetal growth? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 1996, 7(2), p. 104–107.

12. Simon-Bouy, B., Satre, V., Ferec, C., et al. Hyperechogenic fetal bowel: a large collaborative study of 682 cases. Amer J Med Genet, 2003, 121A, p. 209–213.

13. Slotnik, RN., Abuhamad, AZ. Prognostic implication of fetal echogenic bowel. Lancet, 1996, 1, p. 85–87.

14. Stringer, MD., Thornton, JG., Mason, GC. Hyperechogenic fetal bowel. Archives of disease in childhood. J Brit Paediatric Assoc, 1996, 74, F1–F2.

15. Strocker, AM., Snijders, RJ., Carlson, DE., et al. Fetal echogenic bowel: parameters to be considered in differential diagnosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2000, 16, p. 519–523.

16. Vávrová, V., Bartošová, D., a kol. Cystická fibrosa – Příručka pro nemocné a jejich rodiče, 2. vyd. Professional Publishing, 2009, ISBN 978-80-7431-000-3.

17. Vávrová, V., Zemková, D., Skalická, V., et al. Cystická fibrosa v ČR. Practicus, 2008, 8, s. 17–21.

18. Votava, F., Adam, T., Zeman, J., Macek, M. Novorozenecký screening – http://www.novorozeneckyscreening.cz.

19. http://www.molekulara.cz/co-vysetrujeme/cysticka fibrosa.

Labels
Paediatric gynaecology Gynaecology and obstetrics Reproduction medicine

Article was published in

Czech Gynaecology

Issue 1

2015 Issue 1

Most read in this issue
Login
Forgotten password

Don‘t have an account?  Create new account

Forgotten password

Enter the email address that you registered with. We will send you instructions on how to set a new password.

Login

Don‘t have an account?  Create new account