Being Pregnant
Simple Blood Test Could Make Amniocentesis and CVS Test Obsolete
If you’ve even gotten an amniocentesis or chorionic villi sampling, you know that these tests are not easy things to go through. Both procedures involve some level of pain, and more painfully, some level of risk. Miscarriage is a slight but real possibility with any form of invasive prenatal testing.
In order to get reliable information about a fetus’ genetic makeup, one or the other of these tests has been necessary. But a new procedure may soon make these invasive procedures part of pregnancy history.
The testing method is cheap, it’s easy, it’s reliable, and it can be done as part of a routine prenatal visit…maybe even the first prenatal visit. Genetic data can be obtained as early as 6 weeks of gestation. And results can be received in as little as 24-48 hours.
So what is this miracle test?
The test, developed by a group of researchers in the Netherlands, is known as “Multiplex Ligation-dependent Probe Amplification” (MLPA). It uses a genetic probe to look for fetal genetic information in the mother’s blood. The technique was previously only used on samples from amnio or cvs, but new research shows that it will work on a mother’s blood as well.
The technique is still being developed, and as yet has only been used to parse limited genetic information. But doctors are confident that they will be able to apply the same method used to determine the makeup of xx and xy chromosomes to get information about possible genetic diseases in early pregnancy.
At this stage the test is still somewhat less conclusive than invasive testing, but the authors expect that as the technique is developed the accuracy will improve. They hope the test will be available in clinics in two to five years.
photo: Lori Greig/flickr
Go Back To Being Pregnant
6 Comments
Kiki commented on Jul 01 10 at 11:54 am…and what difference does it make?
ceridwen commented on Jul 01 10 at 12:08 pmRejoice! Amnios are done around 4 months into pregnancy, which can be hard– having to wait, having to risk pregnancy loss, having to consider the option of terminating at 18-20 weeks. Even if everything turns out fine, which it mostly does. It’s stressful. CVS is done sooner than an amnio, but still involves some risk. The option of a non-invasive, early test is a huge step in the right direction!
Jaime commented on Jul 01 10 at 5:16 pmWow! How great! Now we can rid ourselves of even more nuisance babies (Downs syndrome (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/09/us/09down.html?_r=1), mental retardation, cystic fibrosis) before they start looking too much like babies!! I don’t know about you, but every time I walk down the street and see a person who is outside the norm, I thank God that I have the ability to nip any little buggers of mine in the bud before anyone knows I got “picked” to be his mommy!
Grow up people. These tests are being mainstreamed to rid our population of the challenge of “less than healthy” children. God bless the mothers and fathers who are now in the position that they must choose life for these challenging, but rewarding children. Easier access to knowing about anomalies will only lead to more children dying.
Stop saying that all you want is a healthy baby, and start saying you want the baby you are meant to have.
http://biglittledays.blogspot.com/2010/04/happy-birthday-lumpy-and-meg.html
Melissa commented on Jul 21 10 at 1:03 pmJamie – I can appreciate the love you have for your children but your comment was draped in viscious sarcasm. I’m sure that wasn’t your intention as you used God’s name several times in the same e-mail. You must respect the beliefs and rights of all people when making such tough decisions. Tests are done for a lot of reasons….for example, the thought of a child suffering for a year only to die a painful death is not everyone’s idea of God’s plan. Or perhaps something can be done to improve an unborn child’s quality of life before being born as a result of the test.
Regardless, it’s their choice and your judgment speaks more about YOUR ability to be accepting than it does anyone else. The way you’ve chosen to share your opinion (with pregnant women who read this site) disturbing. It sounds like the same people who justify killing someone at abortion clinics.
Deal with your anger and let people make their own choices. This is still America.
Brittney commented on Aug 13 10 at 3:57 pmThis is wonderful. We refused an amnio (I was pregnant at 37) because I wouldn’t risk harming a healthy child. LUCKY for me, my son was healthy. Crucify me if you will, but I would not have wanted and if I plan to have another child, I do not want a severely deformed or special needs child. Yes, financially and emotionally I would not want to be that drained nor jeopardize my marriage and sons financial stability. I would just prefer to make a private decision to end the pregnancy and test as early as possible…without risking what is probably a perfectly healthy baby anyway.
Guest commented on Aug 21 10 at 1:13 pmJamie – you are a moron.
Add your take:
Note: Babble is a supportive, diverse community. We encourage a range of opinions,
but any unduly hostile comments will be removed.
Comments are delayed up to 15 minutes
Kristin Ruiz 
Rebekah Kuschmider .jpg)
CaitlinHTP (Caitlin Boyle) 
Lauren Hartmann 
Michelle Horton 
Ceridwen Morris 
Katie 
Devan McGuinness 
Lauren Jimeson 
The Walt Disney Company supports Babble as a platform dedicated to honest, engaged, informed, intelligent and open conversation about parenting. However, the opinions expressed on this site are those of individual parents/writers and do not reflect the views of Disney. In addition, content provided on this site is for entertainment or informational purposes only and should not be construed as medical advice, diagnosis, treatment, or safety advice.
6