BackgroundExome sequencing is now being incorporated into clinical care for pediatric and adult populations, but its integration into prenatal diagnosis has been more limited. One reason for this is the paucity of information about the clinical utility of exome sequencing in the prenatal setting.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed indications, results, time to results (turnaround time, TAT), and impact of exome results for 146 consecutive “fetal exomes” performed in a clinical diagnostic laboratory between March 2012 and November 2017. We define a fetal exome as one performed on a sample obtained from a fetus or a product of conception with at least one structural anomaly detected by prenatal imaging or autopsy. Statistical comparisons were performed using Fisher’s exact test.ResultsPrenatal exome yielded an overall molecular diagnostic rate of 32% (n = 46/146). Of the 46 molecular diagnoses, 50% were autosomal dominant disorders (n = 23/46), 41% were autosomal recessive disorders (n = 19/46), and 9% were X-linked disorders (n = 4/46). The molecular diagnostic rate was highest for fetuses with anomalies affecting multiple organ systems and for fetuses with craniofacial anomalies. Out of 146 cases, a prenatal trio exome option designed for ongoing pregnancies was performed on 62 fetal specimens, resulting in a diagnostic yield of 35% with an average TAT of 14 days for initial reporting (excluding tissue culture time). The molecular diagnoses led to refined recurrence risk estimates, altered medical management, and informed reproductive planning for families.ConclusionExome sequencing is a useful diagnostic tool when fetal structural anomalies suggest a genetic etiology, but other standard prenatal genetic tests did not provide a diagnosis.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13073-018-0582-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Despite having experienced complexity and identified challenges of the reproductive genetic counseling, availability of diagnostic WES contributed important information that aided in prenatal care planning and decision-making. Future enhanced provider education and larger studies to systematically study the integration of WES in reproductive genetic counseling and prenatal care will be important.

No abstract

Religion and spirituality (R/S) are important components of many individuals’ lives, and spirituality is often employed by women coping with pregnancy complications. To characterize how prenatal genetic counselors might address spiritual issues with patients, 283 English and Spanish speaking women receiving prenatal genetic counseling in Houston, Texas were surveyed post‐counseling using both the Brief RCope and questions regarding interest in spiritual exploration. Genetic counselors were concurrently surveyed to identify religious/spiritual language used within sessions and perceived importance of R/S. Genetic counselors were significantly more likely to identify R/S as important to a patient when patients used religious/spiritual language (p < 0.001). Conversely, when no religious/spiritual terms were present, the counselor felt uncertain about the importance of R/S 63 % of the time. However, 67 % of patients reported that they felt comfortable sharing their faith as it relates to their pregnancy, and 93 % reported using positive religious coping. Less than 25 % reported a desire for overt religious actions such as prayer or scripture exploration. Therefore, most patients’ desires for spiritual exploration center in the decision making and coping processes that are in line with the genetic counseling scope of practice. Thus, counselors should feel empowered to incorporate spiritual exploration into their patient conversations.

Objective To determine patient perception of residual risk after receiving a negative non-invasive prenatal testing result. Introduction Recent technological advances have yielded a new method of prenatal screening, non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT), which uses cell-free fetal DNA from the mother's blood to assess for aneuploidy. NIPT has much higher detection rates and positive predictive values than previous methods however, NIPT is not diagnostic. Past studies have demonstrated that patients may underestimate the limitations of prenatal screening; however, patient perception of NIPT has not yet been assessed. Methods and Materials We conducted a prospective cohort study to assess patient understanding of the residual risk for aneuploidy after receiving a negative NIPT result. Ninety-four participants who had prenatal genetic counseling and a subsequent negative NIPT were surveyed. Results There was a significant decline in general level of worry after a negative NIPT result (p = <0.0001). The majority of participants (61%) understood the residual risk post NIPT. Individuals with at least four years of college education were more likely to understand that NIPT does not eliminate the chance of trisomy 13/18 (p = 0.012) and sex chromosome abnormality (p = 0.039), and were more likely to understand which conditions NIPT tests for (p = 0.021), compared to those women with less formal education. Conclusion These data demonstrate that despite the relatively recent implementation of NIPT into obstetric practice, the majority of women are aware of its limitations after receiving genetic counseling. However, clinicians may need to consider alternative ways to communicate the limitations of NIPT to those women with less formal education to ensure understanding.