Has anyone heard of/used this prenatal test?

[h]

I just got back from my first prenatal appointment with my OB. All is well--baby is measuring right on schedule (8 weeks today) with a little heart beating away.

My doctor and I discussed prenatal testing, and she recommended that I do a new test called MaterniT21 rather than the NT screening that I did with our other two kids. It's a blood test done at 10 weeks and apparently tests for T21, T18, and T13 with 99% accuracy, so it is both earlier and more accurate than the NT screen. We would still follow up with CVS or amnio if the test was positive.

My OB made it sound like a no-brainer, and I love the idea of getting more accurate results without having to go straight to an amnio (I am advanced maternal age). But I had never heard of this test before today and would love more information before deciding which route to take.

Any experiences?

[thatgirl2478]

Well, it's a blood test, which means it's no harm to you or the baby. I would go for it, even though I haven't heard of it. Can you still get the NT screen as well? The only thing I would be concerned about with a new test is the possibility of a false positive or false negative. Having the standard NT test results to back up the findings of the new test would make me feel better.

[OscarQ]

Yes, I was offered this test when I went for my CVS (as an alternative to it). I skipped it as I wanted the full CVS results.

[Deleted]

My OB also recommended this. She also said not a lot of insurance companies are covering it yet, so if that's a concern, you may want to check into that aspect.

We'll probably do it because I like the idea of a yes or no response as opposed to potential odds.

[thatgirl2478]

Sept 13, 2012 10:50:50 GMT -5 OscarQ said:

Yes, I was offered this test when I went for my CVS (as an alternative to it). I skipped it as I wanted the full CVS results.

Sorry to be invasive, but did you have other risk factors (NT test results or other) that indicated a higher probability of birth defects? The CVS is a much more invasive test than either the NT or the test that the OP asked about.

If you feel it's too personal, please tell me to butt out - I won't be offended .

[h]

Sept 13, 2012 10:50:24 GMT -5 thatgirl2478 said:

Well, it's a blood test, which means it's no harm to you or the baby. I would go for it, even though I haven't heard of it. Can you still get the NT screen as well? The only thing I would be concerned about with a new test is the possibility of a false positive or false negative. Having the standard NT test results to back up the findings of the new test would make me feel better.

It would be in lieu of the NT screen. My OB said doing both is pointless and that MaterniT21 is better. That is the part that makes me hestitant--if I could do both I definitely would. As you said, there is no harm in a blood test.

I guess I should check with my insurance. My OB said she thought it would be covered in insurance will generally covering additional testing that is recommended due to advanced maternal age.

[OscarQ]

Sept 13, 2012 10:54:37 GMT -5 thatgirl2478 said:

Sept 13, 2012 10:50:50 GMT -5 OscarQ said:

Yes, I was offered this test when I went for my CVS (as an alternative to it). I skipped it as I wanted the full CVS results.

Sorry to be invasive, but did you have other risk factors (NT test results or other) that indicated a higher probability of birth defects? The CVS is a much more invasive test than either the NT or the test that the OP asked about.

If you feel it's too personal, please tell me to butt out - I won't be offended .

Oh please, you're not offending me and I'm always happy to talk about my reasons behind doing the CVS.

I'm 38 so AMA. This is actually my second pregnancy where I did the CVS. I was 36 with the first pregnancy. I'm just very much a "I need to know the facts in black and white" kind of person. So is my H and I'd had a previous loss due to a genetic defect so I wanted as full a picture as I could get as early as possible - which is a CVS test. I'm far too impatient to wait for an amnio.

I skipped all other prenatal testing (we had done pre-conception genetic counseling and we'd had genetic testing done on the m/c so I knew our odds pretty well - we had no additional contributing factors other than age) and went straight to CVS with both pregnancies.

Good luck with whatever you decide to do!

[cep1976]

I had it after my second tri screening shot my odds of T21 way up after good results on the NT scan and first tri blood work. Even though insurance doesn't cover it, at the time, the company that does it covered the bulk of the cost if you did have insurance, and patients only had to pay $250. I imagine this was because they were collecting insurance information to make the case to insurers that it should be covered. I had it in February/March of this year. My OB said at the time he thinks it will eventually replace amnio as it is like .1 less accurate with none of the risk.

[atouchofklasse]

Sept 13, 2012 14:46:09 GMT -5 @fivedogs said:

The test itself is scientifically awesome - it's just a question of insurance coverage. I would definitely get the codes and find out if it is covered specifically and hopefully an approximation of what you would pay.

Agreed!

[barefootcontessa]

I opt out of the NT test/scan and wait until the full anatomy scan. But if I was going to do early screening, I do not think I would trade the NT for the new blood test because the NT scan can also pick up neural tube defects as well as indicate potential heart problems. My understanding is that the fold measurement also correlates with potential heart defects. So I would have the NT scan/bllodwork and then follow-up with the blood test if there is cause for concern.

[h]

Sept 13, 2012 15:43:50 GMT -5 barefootcontessa said:

I opt out of the NT test/scan and wait until the full anatomy scan. But if I was going to do early screening, I do not think I would trade the NT for the new blood test because the NT scan can also pick up neural tube defects as well as indicate potential heart problems. My understanding is that the fold measurement also correlates with potential heart defects. So I would have the NT scan/bllodwork and then follow-up with the blood test if there is cause for concern.

My understanding is that the NT screen does not screen for neural tube defects but does sometimes pick up cardiac issues. But honestly, my biggest concern are the trisomies, given my age.

Plus, we would terminate for T18 or T13, so we would want to know about them as soon as possible. Doing the blood test at 10 weeks would give us results around 11 weeks and would allow us to do a CVS shortly thereafter if we got a positive result and needed to follow up. Waiting to do the NT screen would likely mean that we would not get results until it was too late for CVS, so we would have to wait and do an amnio in the case of a positive result. We would not have a definitive diagnosis until the pregnancy was significantly further along.

[catbus]

I opted for the MaterniT21 test and found it a great alternative to amnio. I actually posted about it in response to Anna's post about her friend losing her baby after amnio. In my case, the NT scan/tri-screen brought up absolutely nothing of concern. I'm 28, H is 29, we have no family history of chromosomal abnormalities, etc., but at the anatomy scan the radiologist saw what he thought could be bilateral clubfoot and an echogenic cardiac focus, both of which *can* be soft markers for trisomies 18 and/or 21. In most cases they're nothing and are completely isolated.

We met with a genetic counselor whom my doctor referred us to. She gave us a choice between amnio or MaterniT21 if we wanted to know definitively whether we'd be dealing with chromosomal issues. We opted for M21. We didn't even know for sure whether the test would be covered by my insurance (it ended up being covered 100%), but the peace of mind that $265 bought was totally worth it. I know amniocentesis is a valuable tool, but the risks just scared me too much. My feeling was that if the M21 results were positive, we'd then opt for an amnio just for verification before choosing to terminate (which we likely would have done had the test been positive for T18).

I absolutely recommend the test, and I think that even the full OOP cost is worthwhile if you're uncomfortable with the risks that come with amnio.

[kittycatlove]

I've never heard of the test either but I would totally do it. I was AMA when we got pregnant as well and decided to skip all the probability tests and went straight to the CVS because like you we needed to know for sure. I think it's a no brainer especially since it's just a blood test.

[thatgirl2478]

Oscar - thank you for explaining.

[karla]

Yes I have heard lots about it. I actually did a paternity test in that way. The blood is just a normal blood draw- I don't like the idea because I am very squeamish but far better than amnio or CVS. I am not sure though in your case how things work when this test is used for T21 and the baby's health. But the test is apparently really advanced and very accurate www.easy-dna.com/prenatal-paternity-test/science.html