Demonstration projects are valuable in determining the feasibility of screening and in refining the practical application of screening. They are of less value in determining the performance of different screening methods. Several demonstration projects have been conducted using the triple and double tests. In general, the uptake of screening was about 80%. The screen positive rates were about 5-6%. About 80% of women with positive screening results had an invasive diagnostic test, and of those found to have a pregnancy with Down's syndrome, about 90% chose to have a termination of pregnancy. ULTRASOUND MARKERS AT 15-22 WEEKS OF PREGNANCY: There are a number of ultrasound markers of Down's syndrome at 15-22 weeks, including nuchal fold thickness, cardiac abnormalities, duodenal atresia, femur length, humerus length, pyelectasis, and hyperechogenic bowel. (ABSTRA

Conclusion -Antenatal maternal serum screening for Down's syndrome is effective in practice and can be readily integrated into routine antenatal care. It is cost effective and performs better than selection for amniocentesis on the basis of maternal age alone.

Objective To investigate the effect of using a routine ultrasound estimate of gestational age and maternal weight adjustment on maternal serum alpha‐fetoprotein (AFP), unconjugated oestriol (uE3) and human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) levels in antenatal screening for Down's syndrome. Design Women with a singleton pregnancy without Down's syndrome were screened using the three serum markers and an estimate of gestational age based on ‘dates’ (time since first day of the last menstrual period) and one based on an ultrasound scan examination was recorded together with maternal weight. Setting Women attending the Homerton Hospital, Hackney, for their antenatal care between February 1989 and January 1990. Subjects 2113 women with a singleton pregnancy without Down's syndrome. Results The use of ultrasound to estimate gestational age (usually based on the biparietal diameter of the fetal skull) led to a significant reduction in the variance of each marker at a given week of pregnancy. The level of each marker was negatively associated with maternal weight, so that adjustment for weight also led to a reduction in variance. These data on gestational age and maternal weight, taken together with published data on pregnancies associated with Down's syndrome, indicate that the routine use of ultrasound to estimate gestational age will increase the detection rate from 58% to 67% while maintaining the false‐positive rate at 5%, or reduce the false‐positive rate from 5.7% to 3.1% while maintaining the detection rate at 60%. Routine maternal weight adjustment for the serum marker levels was much less useful, increasing the detection rate by about 0.5% for a given false‐positive rate, or reducing the false‐positive rate about 0.1% for a given detection rate. Conclusion An ultrasound gestational age estimate available at the time of Down's syndrome screening confers a substantial advantage to screening performance with a further small benefit resulting from maternal weight adjustment, which is worth adopting if it can be done without difficulty or extra cost.

Nine centres collaborated to examine the feasibility of a screening method for trisomy 18 that was based on assigning individual risk, using a combination of maternal age and measurements of alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), unconjugated oestriol (uE3), and human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG). Second-trimester measurements of these analytes were obtained from 94 trisomy 18 pregnancies. In the 89 pregnancies without an associated open defect, the median levels for AFP, uE3, and hCG were 0.65, 0.43 and 0.36 multiples of the unaffected population median, respectively. The strongest individual predictor of risk for trisomy 18 was uE3, followed by hCG, AFP, and maternal age, in that order. Using a method of individual risk estimation that is based on the three markers and maternal age, 60 per cent of pregnancies associated with trisomy 18 would be detected at a risk cut-off level of 1:100, with a false-positive rate of about 0.2 per cent. One in nine pregnancies identified as being at increased risk for trisomy 18 would be expected to have an affected pregnancy. This risk-based screening method is more efficient than an existing method that is based on fixed analyte cut-off levels. Even though the birth prevalence of trisomy 18 is low, prenatal screening can be justified when performed in conjunction with Down syndrome screening and when a high proportion of women offered amniocentesis have an affected fetus.