Search

Background: To explore reasons for the failure of noninvasive prenatal test (NIPT) for cell‐free fetal DNA (cffDNA) in maternal peripheral blood, and discuss appropriate treatment schemes after the failure of the test. Methods: Altogether 41,136 pregnant women participated in NIPT. Blood samples were taken again from pregnant women who failed the first blood collection upon their informed consent. Prenatal genetic counseling or prenatal diagnosis was recommended for pregnant women with final NIPT failure. Results: The first failure rate of NIPT was 0.737% (303/41136), and the reason for the failure was the low ratio of cffDNA in 135 (44.6%) of the 303 pregnant women. After the second or third blood sampling, the final failure rate was 0.182% (75/41136). The low ratio of cffDNA was the main reason for test failure in 42 (56.0%) of the 75 pregnant women who finally failed NIPT, among whom 44 (58.7%) had underlying diseases, including 21 (47.7%) with more than two coexisting underlying diseases. Only 27 (36.0%) of the 75 pregnant women with NIPT failure underwent interventional prenatal diagnosis. Conclusions: The main reason for NIPT failure was the low ratio of cffDNA. Postponing the gestational weeks of blood collection may improve the success rate. Resampling and retesting upon informed consent in pregnant women who failed the first test could improve the success rate. For pregnant women who finally failed NIPT, it is suggested strengthening the genetic counseling, prenatal examination, and ultrasound evaluation, and carry out interventional prenatal diagnosis if necessary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aim: Results obtained from different hepatitis E virus (HEV) tests are usually inconsistent. The detection of serum HEV antigen (Ag) has been suggested to be more sensitive for the diagnosis of genotypes 1 and 3 HEV. Methods: We compared the diagnostic accuracies of serum HEV Ag and HEV RNA by using 202 serum samples from patients suspected acute viral hepatitis. Results: The HEV Ag assay was 100% specific. The lower detected levels of viremia ranged from 102 to 103 copies/mL. The sensitivity of the HEV Ag test was 90.5%. One of the 42 cases was negative for anti‐HEV IgM, but HEV Ag was still detectable. The detectable period of HEV Ag was in concordance with the detectable period of HEV RNA. Serum HEV Ag was persistently detected in two cases of chronic hepatitis E, confirmed by the persistent presence of HEV RNA despite being negative for anti‐HEV IgM. HEV Ag demonstrated good consistency with positive HEV RNA (k = 0.938, P < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic analysis of HEV Ag suggested a second cut‐off value of >0.095 to predict HEV patients with 95.24% sensitivity and 98.75% specificity, and the area under the curve was 0.9887, which was higher than that of three commercial anti‐HEV IgM ELISA tests. Conclusions: The presence of HEV Ag has good consistency with HEV RNA in both acute and chronic genotype 4 hepatitis E. HEV Ag is a more promising serum marker to identify active genotype 4 HEV infection than anti‐HEV IgM and HEV RNA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]