Paeds Vivas · genetics-dysmorphology-and-metabolism
Prenatal diagnosis and reproductive genetics — branching viva
Branching viva from a positive cell-free DNA screen through microarray interpretation, variant of uncertain significance reasoning, consanguinity and PGT-M counselling, and the paediatrician's role in translating genotype to postnatal plan.
On this page & tools
Target exams
Station opening
Examiner: "The cell-free DNA screen is positive for trisomy 21 at high probability. The patient asks whether the baby has Down syndrome. What do you say?" [3]
Strong candidate (must-hit)
- A positive cfDNA screen is a screen, not a confirmed diagnosis. It raises probability and warrants counselling and an offer of diagnostic testing (CVS or amniocentesis by gestation). [3]
- Separates screening from diagnosis explicitly and states that confirmation is needed before any management decision. [3]
- Quotes contemporary, not legacy, procedure-related miscarriage risk for the diagnostic procedure. [4]
Weak candidate
- "Your baby has Down syndrome." [3]
- Offers a repeat cfDNA screen instead of diagnostic testing when pre-test probability is high. [3]
Branch A — Choosing the diagnostic test and the first-tier laboratory test
Examiner: "The patient consents to amniocentesis. What laboratory test do you request on the sample, and why?" [1]
Strong
- Requests chromosomal microarray as the first-tier test, because the anatomy scan shows a cardiac anomaly and microarray detects copy-number variants that karyotype misses. [1]
- Cites the Wapner trial: microarray identified clinically significant CNVs in approximately 6% of structurally abnormal fetuses with a normal karyotype. [1]
- Explains what microarray cannot detect: balanced rearrangements, low-level mosaicism, and single-nucleotide variants. [6]
Weak
- "A karyotype is the standard test." [1]
- Cannot explain the resolution difference between karyotype and microarray. [6]
Branch B — A variant of uncertain significance
Examiner: "The microarray returns, not a trisomy, but a variant of uncertain significance — a copy-number variant of unknown clinical significance. How do you counsel the family?" [6]
Strong
- States that a VUS is a real finding whose clinical meaning is genuinely not yet established by the scientific community — it is neither pathogenic nor benign. [6]
- Offers parental testing: if the VUS is inherited from an unaffected parent, incomplete penetrance is more likely; if de novo, it is more likely to be significant. [1]
- Plans database review (ClinGen, ClinVar), phenotype matching, and periodic reanalysis as knowledge accumulates. [6]
- Does not let the VUS drive irreversible decisions without further clarification. [6]
Weak
- "It is probably nothing, don't worry about it." [6]
- "This finding means your baby will have developmental delay." [6]
Branch C — Consanguinity and reproductive options
Examiner: "A different couple are first cousins and have had one child die of an undiagnosed neurodegenerative disorder. They are pregnant again. What reproductive options can you discuss?" [8]
Strong
- Estimates empirical recurrence risk: approximately 1 in 4 per pregnancy for an autosomal recessive condition, with first-cousin couples carrying an additional 2–3% excess risk above baseline. [7]
- Outlines the strategy to identify the gene: autozygosity mapping plus exome or genome sequencing using DNA from the affected child or both parents. [11]
- Presents the reproductive menu: PGT-M (IVF, embryo biopsy, testing for the familial mutation, transfer of unaffected embryos), prenatal diagnosis (CVS or amniocentesis with targeted testing) each pregnancy, donor gametes, and acceptance of risk. [8]
- Counsels honestly that PGT-M does not guarantee a live birth and that many programmes recommend prenatal confirmation. [8]
Weak
- "Consanguinity always causes problems; do not have more children." [7]
- Offers PGT-M without explaining the IVF requirement, cumulative cost or the allele drop-out limitation. [8]
Branch D — Confined placental mosaicism on CVS
Examiner: "Another patient had a CVS that reported mosaicism for trisomy 21. Is the fetus affected?" [4]
Strong
- CVS samples placental trophoblast, not fetal cells. Mosaicism on CVS may reflect confined placental mosaicism rather than the true fetal genotype. [4]
- Confirms with amniocentesis, which samples fetal cells in amniotic fluid and reflects the true fetal karyotype. [6]
- Explains that confined placental mosaicism occurs in approximately 1–2% of CVS samples and that over-calling it can lead to irreversible decisions based on non-representative tissue. [6]
Weak
- "Mosaicism on CVS means the baby has mosaic Down syndrome." [4]
- "Reassure the patient — placental mosaicism is always benign." [6]
Branch E — The paediatrician's role
Examiner: "A pathogenic 22q11.2 deletion is confirmed on microarray. As the paediatrician, what is your antenatal role?" [1]
Strong
- Translates the diagnosis into a postnatal plan: neonatal team readiness for cardiac evaluation, calcium monitoring, immune assessment and feeding evaluation. [1]
- Opens the multidisciplinary pathway: clinical genetics, paediatric cardiology and cardiac surgery, neonatology, immunology, and parent support. [6]
- Decides place and time of delivery at a centre with neonatal cardiac capability and ensures the neonatal team is alerted. [6]
- Holds the medical-home role: developmental surveillance, ongoing follow-up, and the family's continuity of care through birth and beyond. [6]
Weak
- "That is obstetrics; I will see the baby after birth." [6]
- Offers a single outcome narrative that ignores family values, available therapy and the variable expressivity of the syndrome. [1]
References
- [1]Wapner RJ, Martin CL, Levy B, et al. Chromosomal microarray versus karyotyping for prenatal diagnosis. The New England journal of medicine, 2012.PMID 23215555
- [3]Norton ME, Jacobsson B, Swamy GK, et al. Cell-free DNA analysis for noninvasive examination of trisomy. The New England journal of medicine, 2015.PMID 25830321
- [4]Salomon LJ, Sotiriadis A, Wulff CB, et al. Risk of miscarriage following amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling: systematic review. Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology, 2019.PMID 31124209
- [6]Stosic M, Levy B, Wapner R. The use of chromosomal microarray analysis in prenatal diagnosis. Obstetrics and gynecology clinics of North America, 2018.PMID 29428286
- [7]American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Screening for Fetal Chromosomal Abnormalities: ACOG Practice Bulletin Summary, Number 226. Obstetrics and gynecology, 2020.PMID 32976375
- [8]Spinella F, Bronet F, Carvalho F, et al. ESHRE PGT Consortium data collection XXI: PGT analyses in 2018. Human reproduction open, 2023.PMID 37091225
- [11]Lord J, McMullan DJ, Eberhardt RY, et al. Prenatal exome sequencing in congenital heart disease (CODE) study. Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology, 2021.PMID 32388881