无创产前DNA检测与传统产前诊断在产前筛查高风险和高危因素孕妇中的应用效果对比分析

Comparative Analysis of the Effect of Non-invasive Prenatal DNA Detection and Traditional Prenatal Diagnosis in the Prenatal Screening of High-risk and High-Risk Pregnant Women

目的:研究无创产前DNA检测与传统产前诊断在产前筛查高风险与高危因素孕妇中的应用效果对比。方法:选取2017年4月至2018年4月医院接受的孕妇200例,随机分为对照组和观察组,各100例。对照组采取传统产前诊断,观察组采取无创产前DNA检测。比较两组干预措施选择情况和检测阳性率情况。结果:观察组中,产前筛查高风险孕妇(6.00%)低于对照组(30.00%),高危因素孕妇(94.00%)高于对照组(70.00%),均有显著差异(P<0.05)。观察组检测阳性率(1.00%)低于对照组(10.00%),有显著差异(P<0.05)。结论:两种检查方法在干预措施选择及检测阳性率方面,都有明显区别。传统产前诊断仍有不可替代的优势,但无创产前DNA检测的孕妇接受程度更好,具体如下。

Objective: To study the effect of noninvasive prenatal DNA test and traditional prenatal diagnosis in pregnant women with high risk and high risk factors in prenatal screening. Methods: From April 2017 to April 2018, 200 pregnant women were randomly divided into control group(n=100) and observation group(n=100). The control group was diagnosed by traditional antenatal diagnosis, and the observation group was detected by noninvasive antenatal DNA. The choice of intervention measures and the positive rate of test were compared between the two groups. Results: In the observation group, 6.00% of the pregnant women at high risk of antenatal screening were lower than those of the control group(30.00%), and the high risk factors of pregnant women were higher than those of the control group(70.00%)(P<0.05). The positive rate of the observation group was 1.00%, which was significantly lower than that of the control group(10.00%)(P<0.05). Conclusion: The two methods have obvious difference in the selection of the intervention measures and the positive rate of the detection. The traditional prenatal diagnosis still has the irreplaceable advantages, but the pregnant women who do not have the prenatal DNA detection are better accepted, As follows.