{Reference Type}: Journal Article
{Title}: Diagnostic and perinatal outcomes in consanguineous couples with a structural fetal anomaly: A cohort study.
{Author}: Mone F;Doyle S;Ahmad A;Abu Subieh H;Hamilton S;Allen S;Marton T;Williams D;Kilby MD;
{Journal}: Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand
{Volume}: 100
{Issue}: 3
{Year}: 03 2021
{Factor}: 4.544
{DOI}: 10.1111/aogs.14036
{Abstract}: Consanguineous unions occur when a couple are related outside marriage and is associated with adverse genetic and perinatal outcomes for affected offspring. The objectives of this study were to evaluate: (i) background characteristics, (ii) uptake of prenatal and postnatal investigation and (iii) diagnostic outcomes of UK consanguineous couples presenting with a fetal structural anomaly.<BR>This was a retrospective and partly prospective cohort study comparing consanguineous (n = 62) and non-consanguineous (n = 218) pregnancies with current or previous fetal structural anomalies reviewed in a UK prenatal genetic clinic from 2008 to 2019. Outcomes were compared using odds ratios (OR).<BR>Most consanguineous couples were of Pakistani ethnicity (odds ratio [OR] 29, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 13-62) and required use of an interpreter [OR 9, 95% CI 4-20). In the consanguineous group, the uptake of prenatal invasive testing was lower (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.7) and the number declining follow up was greater (OR 10, 95% CI 3-34) than in the non-consanguineous group. This likely explained the lower proportion of consanguineous couples where a final definitive unifying diagnosis to explain the fetal structural anomalies was reached (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.2-0.6). When a diagnosis was obtained in this group, it was always postnatal and most often using genomic sequencing technologies (OR 6, 95% CI 1-27). The risk of perinatal death was greater (OR 3, 95% CI 1-6) in the consanguineous group, as was the risk of fetal structural anomaly recurrence in a subsequent pregnancy (OR 4, 95% CI 1-13). There was no difference in the uptake of perinatal autopsy or termination of pregnancy between groups.<BR>Consanguineous couples are a vulnerable group in the prenatal setting. Although adverse perinatal outcomes in this group are more common secondary to congenital anomalies, despite the evolution of genomic sequencing technologies, due to a lower uptake of prenatal testing it is less likely that a unifying diagnosis is obtained and recurrence can occur. There is a need for proactive genetic counseling and education from the multidisciplinary team, addressing language barriers as well as religious and cultural beliefs in an attempt to optimize reproductive options.