https://boards.hellobee.com/ Pregnancy, Baby and Parenting blog, by Hellobee en Tue, 07 Apr 2026 14:52:59 +0000 https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2691049 Thu, 02 Feb 2017 17:37:28 +0000 JenGirl 2691049@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>Yeah, it looks like Mayo is just counting anything less than 1 in 100 as "negative". Which I think is kind of crappy, because they could definitely be more specific. But doesn't actually say anything more about your test. </p> <p>I will say that the pattern that you expect to see for Tri 18 is low (less than 1.0 MoM) for AFO, uE3 and hCG. So I would think the pattern for your analytes is NOT consistent with Tri 18. </p> <p>That being said, I call BS on them saying that you need an abnormality on U/S to get NIPS (Harmony, Panorama, InformaSeq, etc.). That may have been true a few years ago when these tests first came out, but these are now considered an appropriate screening option for any pregnancy (with exceptions for things like multiples, high level maternal obesity, etc) so they should be an option even without the CPCs, but especially after the CPCs. </p> <p>Here's a link to the updated recommendations from the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology which came out in 2016:<br /> <a href="http://www.acmg.net/docs/NIPS_AOP.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.acmg.net/docs/NIPS_AOP.pdf</a> </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2691003 Thu, 02 Feb 2017 15:45:27 +0000 winniebee 2691003@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>@maybebaby8: Hope you hear back from Mayo soon! </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2690991 Thu, 02 Feb 2017 15:09:12 +0000 maybebaby8 2690991@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>@winniebee: I really hope that's the case! I finally got ahold of my dr's office and the nurse I talked to before that said "that would be the same result for everyone" said she didn't know how the results were reported. So I'm not sure why she said that before. I spoke to another nurse that said because my results were negative I shouldn't worry. She said that is probably just how the lab reports their results. I emailed the Mayo Clinic directly to ask them since apparently no one at my dr's office knows for sure. Still waiting to hear back from them. </p> <p>I have an appointment with mfm on 2/15 so hopefully that will go well. Thanks again for all of your support! </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2689387 Mon, 30 Jan 2017 20:55:38 +0000 winniebee 2689387@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>@maybebaby8: the more I have reflected on how your results were reported them more I'm inclined to think that this is merely how they report a negative result. Especially because mfm is just not concerned about it. </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2689228 Mon, 30 Jan 2017 15:56:51 +0000 maybebaby8 2689228@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>Oh, I also spoke to Maternal Fetal Medicine and asked about doing Materniti21 or Harmony and they pretty much refused to do it. They said I needed to have an abnormality on an ultrasound. They said I have no reason to do it. </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2689213 Mon, 30 Jan 2017 15:48:42 +0000 maybebaby8 2689213@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>@winniebee: Thanks for thinking of me. I've been trying to call my dr all day, their phone systems are completely down and have been since 8 am today. I am so frustrated I could scream. I absolutely hate them for other reasons besides this incident. They have completely taken all of the joy out of this pregnancy for me. </p> <p>I've been doing some research and I've found a few other people that their labs only report &lt; or &gt; than the cutoff so I'm hoping that's how my lab is. When I asked the nurse about my results she said "it would be the same result for everyone", which I'm assuming means everyone with a negative result. Still frustrating. </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2689180 Mon, 30 Jan 2017 15:07:33 +0000 winniebee 2689180@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>Thinking of you and hope you get some answers from your doctor today! </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2688565 Sat, 28 Jan 2017 20:45:57 +0000 charlotte 2688565@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>I'm not sure on the quad screen risk but our daughter had a CPC at the anatomy scan that turned out to be fine as well. My doctor let me take Materniti21 for peace of mind after we saw the cyst and that came back fine. It was a huge relief. Hoping for answers and good news for you soon. </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2688502 Sat, 28 Jan 2017 15:55:09 +0000 psw27 2688502@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>For what it's worth, my doctor doesn't give percentages like 1%. They only give 1 in _____ odds. Also, I agree with @knittylady - A few of my friends (2 are radiologists, 1 is a sonogram tech) said they wish that they didn't have to give this info out at all because more than 99% of the time it is completely harmless and causes no long term effects for the baby. I hope you get some answers soon. </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2688453 Sat, 28 Jan 2017 10:51:51 +0000 knittylady 2688453@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>We got this news at DS1's anatomy scan -I was 28 at the time too. DH is a doctor and after talking to colleagues and hearing the real numbers wasn't concerned at all. On the other hand I threw up on the side of the highway after hearing the news, and had a hard time trusting the pregnancy until DS1 was in my arms.</p> <p>That said, the data is actually on your side, and since my experience I've heard soooooo many stories of this cyst with zero bad endings. My totally layman's explanation is that's its akin to one of those "If a man has a watch he knows what time it is, but just because a man knows what time it is doesn't necessarily mean he has a watch" things. If a baby has trisomy 18 they likely have this cyst, but the vast majority of babies that have this cyst ( which resolves on it's own) DON'T have trisomy 18 don't.</p> <p>Rambly. I hope that made sense. </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2688449 Sat, 28 Jan 2017 10:45:53 +0000 maybebaby8 2688449@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>@delight: that's the hope that I'm holding on to. Mayo Clinic did the testing and if they're not worried I guess that should say something. The baby has also been measuring a few days ahead since around 8 weeks. I want to say she was measuring almost 2 weeks ahead then and she was measuring close to a week ahead when I had my anatomy scan. I know trisomy sometimes presents as slower growth/measuring behind so I'm hoping that is in our favor too. </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2688442 Sat, 28 Jan 2017 09:57:49 +0000 Cole 2688442@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>I think in your case I'd push for a nipt like panorama or verifi just to ease your mind. The results would be back in 1-2 weeks and it's fairly accurate at picking up if there is an issue. Please know, and have your door explain this too, that if it comes back positive for trisomy 18 there I still only a 50% chance the baby has it BUT of the baby has trisomy 18 the odds are 96-99% that it will pick it up. Does that make sense? The odds are different for Downs, my understanding is of it says yes to downs it's almost 100% that the baby has it, the odds are different for each one. My fingers are crossed that your doctor is right in his hunch though! </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2688421 Sat, 28 Jan 2017 08:31:07 +0000 hellobeeboston 2688421@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>@maybebaby8: my second LO had the same cysts found at 19 weeks. We ended up going for extra scans too.... But, the cysts were both gone in a few weeks. My friend is an MFM, and she basically the US scan technology is so good they see so much so they probably won't even mention those cysts anymore if there are no other risk factors. </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2688410 Sat, 28 Jan 2017 03:08:18 +0000 delight 2688410@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>Where I live, 1/100 for trisomy 18 is high<br /> Risk and you would receive genetic counseling and give options for further testing. My baby was 1/17 for T18 and we went on to do a lot of testing. I think likely, your office reports things differently as a PP said and 1/100 may just be the lowest you can get. I would be following up though and explaining concerns. </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2688406 Sat, 28 Jan 2017 02:19:49 +0000 GoGoSnoGirl 2688406@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>I don't remember how our Verifi test results were reported, but I just wanted to help provide some reassurance about CPCs resolving. Our LO had them at our anatomy scan, as well, but the Dr wasn't that concerned since we'd already gotten the NIPT back without anything looking concerning. Best of luck. :goodluck: :heart: </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2688380 Fri, 27 Jan 2017 22:30:01 +0000 maybebaby8 2688380@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>@Grace: @gotkimchi: @bhbee: that's what I'm really hoping it means. It's just scary to hear other people say their risk is 1 in 10,000. I've done a lot of research online and haven't found many people with a risk lower than 1 in 100 though. </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2688370 Fri, 27 Jan 2017 21:52:09 +0000 Grace 2688370@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>@bhbee: I was just thinking that too. It doesn't say 1/100, it says less than 1/100. That says to me that this is their lower limit of detection. </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2688369 Fri, 27 Jan 2017 21:40:57 +0000 gotkimchi 2688369@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>@bhbee: this is how our reports are as well </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2688366 Fri, 27 Jan 2017 21:37:11 +0000 bhbee 2688366@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>@maybebaby8: is it possible that's just how they report results? Anything under 1/100 they consider low risk so your result is either &lt;1/100 (low risk) or something specific higher risk? In which case you really could be 1/10000 because that's &lt;1/100. Just mentioning as I've seen other tests reported like that. </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2688328 Fri, 27 Jan 2017 19:28:28 +0000 avivoca 2688328@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>@maybebaby8: my oldest had these and one resolved by 22 weeks and the other by 26 weeks. </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2688310 Fri, 27 Jan 2017 18:59:09 +0000 winniebee 2688310@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>@maybebaby8: the flipside is that there is a 99% chance this baby is totally fine. I'm sorry that this news is confusing and upsetting. I hope you get some more definitive answers ASAP. </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2688239 Fri, 27 Jan 2017 17:20:35 +0000 matador84 2688239@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>My ob only gives the quad screen as an optional test. </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2688235 Fri, 27 Jan 2017 17:16:24 +0000 maybebaby8 2688235@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>Just picked up my results. It says there's less than a 1% chance of trisomy 18.. I don't understand that if other people have risk factors of 1 in 10,000. I'm confused and upset. </p> [attach=7710/17/okglvd.600x600.20170127_165616.jpg] https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2688187 Fri, 27 Jan 2017 16:02:29 +0000 JenGirl 2688187@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>I actually happen to have this table from an old article sitting around, so I thought I'd share it. This is a publication from 1996, so take it with a grain of salt. This also doesn't break it down by gestational age, but it looks like at age 28 the overall risk for Tri 18 is 1 in 3351. If you have isolated CPCs the risk goes up to 1 in 531. So, an increased risk but still quite low. The large majority of CPCs are just normal variation and don't cause any problems. </p> <p>I will say that I'm surprised that they're calling a 1 in 100 risk of Tri 18 normal on your quad screen. That seems off to me. But, I still think chances are on your side that it's NOT Tri 18, since you didn't see any other anomalies on the ultrasound. </p> [attach=5988/17/okgig5.600x584.Tri-18---CPC.PNG] https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2688183 Fri, 27 Jan 2017 15:57:52 +0000 psw27 2688183@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>I'm currently 28 weeks along and my LO had CPCs as well at my anatomy scan. I was told that without other indicators (rocker feet, heart abnormalities, clenched hands, etc.) the odds were less than 1 in 10,000. I had previously had blood draw at my 13 week scan that which was in the normal range for my age (I don't remember the ratio). I went ahead and did the Maternti21/Panorama test and it came back as less than 1 in 10,000. The cyst was gone at my next scan. </p> <p>I'm sorry that you are going through this, the weeks between results were stressful for me and DH. I knew that statistics were on my side, but it didn't make it any easier. </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2688181 Fri, 27 Jan 2017 15:56:03 +0000 jape14 2688181@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>My screening results listed the age risk for trisomy 18 for my age (31 now, 32 at EDD) as 1 in 1012. My calculated screening risk was &lt;1 in 10,000. I'm looking at the results now, and at the bottom it says (this is from labcorp) that the risk cutoff for trisomy 18 is 1 in 100. I don't want to worry you any more, but if I were you, I'd push back on my doctor about that, ask for a copy of the actual lab results, and further testing/ultrasounds. </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2688163 Fri, 27 Jan 2017 15:31:12 +0000 ElbieKay 2688163@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>@maybebaby8: Can you request the Harmony test? I think that can provide a diagnostic test for T18 instead of just a screen. </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2688158 Fri, 27 Jan 2017 15:22:56 +0000 peachykeen 2688158@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>Choroid plexus cysts were seen on my DD's 20 week scan and had completely disappeared by our level 2 scan one week later. DD was born perfectly healthy - no issues. </p> <p>I did some research at the time and a lot of doctors now believe that choroid plexus cysts are a normal part of development that was just never detected before today's high resolution ultrasound technology. I definitely understand the worry you are going through (we'd done no screening so had no reassurance while we waited) but if that's the only marker they saw there is a VERY good chance everything is fine. </p> <p>Hope the wait goes quickly for you and you get reassuring news soon :heart: </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2688119 Fri, 27 Jan 2017 14:32:41 +0000 winniebee 2688119@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>So, I think technically you are considered a higher risk for a certain condition if your screening comes out as a higher risk than your age. So, like for me, Downs risk for age 36 is like 1/250. So, if my screening came back at anything lower than that, that would be a red flag. I do not know what the risk of Trisomy 18 is at age 28, but I would think it would be a lot higher than 1/100. I'm not trying to freak you out, but it does sound like there is an elevated risk based on your age and the fact that your baby has a marker. That said, the fact that you are so far along and there are NO other markers is a really good sign that there are no issues with your baby. </p> <p>When is your level 2 ultrasound scheduled? I would push to be get in for a level 2 ultrasound ASAP. Thinking of you! </p> https://boards.hellobee.com/topic/quad-test-screening-is-this-considered-high-risk#post-2688118 Fri, 27 Jan 2017 14:32:23 +0000 Coral 2688118@https://boards.hellobee.com/ <p>@maybebaby8: So I didn't have any additional tests but I did want to share my experience with BCPCs. My LO did have CPCs that were detected during my anatomy scan. I was worried and did all kinds of research but without other markers (clubbed feet, clenched hands, heart defects) they are not indicative of anything else and resolve themselves. Even cases where they are not resolved, the CPCs have no bearing on the person's functionality. Our sonographer told us that he sees them about once a month and that he has never in his entire career had them unresolved (gone) by 28 weeks. Sure enough, they were gone by then as well and we have a happy and intelligent 1.5 year old.<br /> My doctor was more interested in the eczema on my hands than the CPCs. It's such a non-issue without other markers. Additionally, it's highly likely that CPCs are a normal part of development that has gone undetected in the past but is now observable due to advanced ultrasound technology. </p>