Did you have the triple screen or quad screen?

[thom]

I'm almost 14 weeks, and at my appointment yesterday my doctor told me to think about whether I want to have the blood test next time to screen for possible abnormalities, Down's syndrome, etc.

I'm not sure whether it's the triple screen or quad screen, but I can call and ask. It sounds like at most bigger practices this is an automatic test, but she likes to give her patients the option. I want to make sure it's covered by insurance first, but I'm kind of leaning toward not doing it anyway. I want the baby no matter what, and in some ways I feel like I'd be borrowing more worry if my results show elevated risk for anything. But, then I do see the benefits of having as much info as possible.

After talking with my H about it he is fine either way. Help me think through this please?

ETA: For reference I have not had any of the other genetic tests or screenings so far. My doctor reminded me that anything really major will show up on the 20 week ultrasound, and I'm trying to decide if I'm at peace with that being enough information. I think I am, but I really appreciate hearing other perspectives.

[july]

It is only probabilities, not a definite diagnosis. You have to perform more invasive tests for a diagnosis, which carry a miscarriage risk. The results can cause a lot if anxiety.
I have heard the quad being used to reduce probabilites for something that was found on the a/s.

We aren't doing it.

[thom]

july - That makes sense. This is exactly why I said I feel like I might be "borrowing worry" if my probabilities are a little high, but I won't know for sure. Either way I don't know that I'd opt for the more invasive testing. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

[jessnpaul]

I'm doing a blood test at 12 weeks (Panorama) to screen for Downs, etc. I'm AMA so they immediately offered it to me, but I hear other people who are younger get it covered by insurance as well (depends on your insurance, of course!)

[jessnpaul]

Also, my last pregnancy my bloodwork was great at 12 weeks. At 16 weeks it came back with a high risk for Downs (it was either 1/9 or 1/11... I forget now). And while I was EXTREMELY against invasive testing, I opted to do the amnio because I had to know!

The amnio wasn't bad at all, honestly. And it ruled out any worries about Downs and other genetic stuff.

[G22]

I did not do it.

[dcn]

I didn't either pregnancy. I was very low risk and together DH and I decided not to do testing. This time I did do a screening blood test called the Penta screening around 15 weeks.

Something to keep in mind is that having the screening doesn't mean you would terminate. The screenings and further tests can also allow you to prepare and plan for a baby who may need additional treatment or services upon birth.

[raangoli]

I am AMA, but my doctor said that all the tests are offered as routine within their practice. I had the first trimester screen and an NT scan. The measurements were in the normal range for the NT scan, but that still put us in a 1/510 chance because of my age. We met with a genetic counselor immediately after the NT scan and she laid out the options. We did choose to do the further testing for the MaterniT21 which like a PP said, it's not a diagnostic test, but a screen.

Those results came back with a decreased risk as well, so we've left it at that.

[Susie]

I did the triple screen. I was ambivalent about it for a lot of the same reasons you mention, but Calvin wanted to do it "to have as much information as possible" and I didn't have any real reason to object. So we did it, and everything came back "no elevated risk," i.e. normal results. That was reassuring. I also liked getting to see her again at the NT scan between 12-13 weeks; I would not have had a u/s then if we didn't do the screen. My understanding is that it's pretty standard and insurance pretty much always covers it, so that wasn't really a worry.

Aside from the triple screen, the only other screening I had done was cystic fibrosis carrier screening, which determined whether I am a CF carrier. (I am not.) Since CF is recessive, if I'm not a carrier, she can't have it. I'll be able to skip that in any future pregnancies since my carrier status obviously can't change.

[mary]

I had a CVS test at 13w2d because of an abnormality that showed up on my NT Scan. Prior to that I'd also had the MaterniT21 test but didn't have results (and those are just probabilities like a triple or quad screen).

The primary reason you'd want to do it is if that higher number would mean that you'd do something differently for the rest of your pregnancy, be it preparation, delivering at a hospital with a higher level NICU, even up to termination. If you wouldn't do anything differently then it's just up to you if you want more information or not.

[thom]

Thank you for all the perspectives. I know it's a personal decision. I also agree with dcn and others who pointed out that the info could help us plan for additional needs & services upon birth if I did have a higher than normal risk of problems.

Like I said before, I see both sides, and I want to make sure I think it through enough to be at peace with my decision.

[Aquatica]

Not sure what tests I was given but I did two rounds. The first at 12 weeks, they took 4 viles, and then the next at 20 weeks, 2 viles. I know they did genetic testing, checked for cystic fibrosis, and other anomalies.

I did the testing because I didn't want any surprises and would like to be prepared. Everything came back fine so it helped ease my worry.

My OB also required that I filled out my genetic family history so they could test for those as well.

[loira]

Oct 8, 2015 12:32:55 GMT -5 thom said:

I'm almost 14 weeks, and at my appointment yesterday my doctor told me to think about whether I want to have the blood test next time to screen for possible abnormalities, Down's syndrome, etc.

I'm not sure whether it's the triple screen or quad screen, but I can call and ask. It sounds like at most bigger practices this is an automatic test, but she likes to give her patients the option. I want to make sure it's covered by insurance first, but I'm kind of leaning toward not doing it anyway. I want the baby no matter what, and in some ways I feel like I'd be borrowing more worry if my results show elevated risk for anything. But, then I do see the benefits of having as much info as possible.

After talking with my H about it he is fine either way. Help me think through this please?

ETA: For reference I have not had any of the other genetic tests or screenings so far. My doctor reminded me that anything really major will show up on the 20 week ultrasound, and I'm trying to decide if I'm at peace with that being enough information. I think I am, but I really appreciate hearing other perspectives.

I had a CVS due to a previous baby with a genetic disorder. I'm with pps that screening or genetic testing gives you more information, regardless of your decision. I'm always in the camp that information is power, and more can only help you and your baby.

I also have a massive problem with how you phrased the bolded.

[mannah]

I have not done any testing with either pregnancy. I was low risk overall and felt comfortable waiting until the anatomy scan to see how things were going in there. This is obviously an incredibly personal decision with no right answer for everyone so you sort of have to decide what feels right to you.

[boiler717]

We did cffDNA instead -- it doesn't totally replace but my doc thought it was more appropriate for us. I'm very glad we did because we had a finding on anatomy scan that is associated with Down's Syndrome. Because it is a weak association and we were low risk from our screening they did not recommend invasive testing like amnio. Had we not done the testing we would have had to make a decision about amnio.

[thom]

loira - I know sincerity doesn't always come across clearly on the internet, but I apologize. I know some parents have to make heartbreaking choices where things aren't black and white, and I didn't mean to offend you.

[loira]

Oct 8, 2015 18:00:46 GMT -5 thom said:

loira - I know sincerity doesn't always come across clearly on the internet, but I apologize. I know some parents have to make heartbreaking choices where things aren't black and white, and I didn't mean to offend you.

I know you didn't mean offence. You didn't come across as judgemental. I guess I just wish people would use phrasing like 'we'd keep the baby no matter what' or 'it wouldn't affect our decision' rather than 'love' or 'want'. It's a bugbear of mine because I feel like it implies I didn't love or want my baby, when I so very much did. My reply was perhaps a little harsher than it needed to be, so I'm sorry, too.

I would never judge someone for opting out of testing, or for making a different choice to the one I made. You have to do what's right for you, and I'm sure you and your H will come to the decision that fits you best.

[sallywalker]

I did the quad screening with my first pregnancy. The results came back with an elevated risk for downs and something else that I cannot remember. They scheduled us an appointment with the maternal fetal specialist at that time. They couldn't get is in for 5 weeks. So I spent every day of those 5 weeks anxious and upset. The appt with the MFM showed that everything was fine. He told us that 9/10 patients that come in with negative quad screen results have nothing actually wrong.

I opted out this pregnancy.

[belovedbride07]

I've accepted every test offered to me, including the quad screening, because I would rather have more information and be able to prepare accordingly. One of my levels on the quad screening came back elevated, which wasn't surprising with multiples but means they'll be watching for intrauterine growth restriction and preterm labor. (Of course, with twins, they're already monitoring me for both, so no change in protocol for me!)

[konapoppy]

I know I don't go here anymore, but wanted to chime in.

This screening is what let us know that we were at high risk for chromosomal issues, which led to the identification of a fatal abnormality at 17w. Before we got the results everyone had told us not to worry, that the test gives tons of false positives. For us, it was devastatingly accurate. After our experience we didn't think we would do the test if I was lucky enough to get pregnant again(just NIPT), but our perinatalogist strongly encourages it.

Even if you really want the baby, some things truly aren't viable. Doing the test earlier rather than later will give you the most options if God forbid something isn't right (and I really really really hope everything is perfect for you!) as well as peace of mind if it is negative.