Abstract
Does M. Down risk calculation differ between the Sybase and the Prisca softwares? We performed 1st trimester screening and calculated M. Down risk for 50 pregnancies using both programs. After these 50 cases we terminated the study because of the large differences that we found comparing biochemical results as well as adjusted risk values based on PAPP-A and free beta-HCG examinations: case 50 showed a biochemical risk of 1 : 2040 (Prisca) and 1 : 847 (Sybase) resulting in an adjusted risk of 1 : 8909 (Prisca) and 1 : 4503 (Sybase), respectively. We found a low correlation between the two programs: comparing biochemical risk the correlation coefficient was 0.59 and 0.60 comparing the adjusted risk. The one M. Down case was indicated correctly: 1:< 10 by Prisca, 1 : 2 by Sybase. For clinical purpose, one should prefer the software (Sybase) that was evaluated more profoundly in clinical trials. It seems very important, that 1st trimester screening should only be performed by licensed examiners well as laboratories.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
