Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · AJP Rep 2020; 10(02): e176-e178
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1709981
Case Report
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Cell-Free DNA as an Addition to Ultrasound for Screening of a Complete Hydatidiform Mole and Coexisting Normal Fetus Pregnancy: A Case Report

Martina G. Gabra 
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Banner-University Medical Center, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona
,
Maritza G. Gonzalez
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Banner-University Medical Center, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona
,
Holly N. Bullock
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Banner-University Medical Center, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona
,
Meghan G. Hill
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Banner-University Medical Center, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona
› Author Affiliations Funding None.
Further Information

Publication History

05 February 2020

20 February 2020

Publication Date:
18 June 2020 (online)

   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Complete hydatidiform mole and coexisting normal fetus pregnancies (CHMCF) are rare and can be life-threatening to the mother. Definitive diagnosis can be made with chorionic villus sampling or amniocentesis. However invasive procedures carry a risk of bleeding. We present the case of a twin molar pregnancy where a cell-free DNA screening test was utilized to evaluate for CHMCF pregnancy.

Case A patient presented at 15-week gestational age with suspected CHMCF pregnancy. Ultrasound revealed a normal-appearing pregnancy abutting a multicystic lesion concerning for a complete mole. Cell-free DNA was obtained and was suggestive of complete paternal uniparental disomy. Pathological evaluation of the products of conception confirmed the diagnosis of CHMCF.

Conclusion In atypical cases, cell-free DNA may be useful in evaluation of molar pregnancy.

Keywords

complete hydatidiform mole and coexisting normal fetus - cell-free DNA - twin-molar pregnancy - hyperemesis gravidarum

Note

Patient consent was obtained for publication of this article.


 

  • References

  • 1 Jones WB, Lauersen NH. Hydatidiform mole with coexistent fetus. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1975; 122 (03) 267-272
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Sauerbrei EE, Salem S, Fayle B. Coexistent hydatidiform mole and live fetus in the second trimester: an ultrasound study. Radiology 1980; 135 (02) 415-417
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Chu W, Chapman J, Persons DL, Fan F. Twin pregnancy with partial hydatidiform mole and coexistent fetus. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2004; 128 (11) 1305-1306
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Mittal D, Anand R, Sisodia N, Singh S, Biswas R. Placental mesenchymal dysplasia: what every radiologist needs to know. Indian J Radiol Imaging 2017; 27 (01) 62-64
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Wee L, Jauniaux E. Prenatal diagnosis and management of twin pregnancies complicated by a co-existing molar pregnancy. Prenat Diagn 2005; 25 (09) 772-776
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Dar P, Curnow KJ, Gross SJ. , et al. Clinical experience and follow-up with large scale single-nucleotide polymorphism-based noninvasive prenatal aneuploidy testing. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014; 211 (05) 527.e1-527.e17
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Kristiansen MK, Niemann I, Lindegaard JC. , et al. Cell-free DNA in pregnancy with choriocarcinoma and coexistent live fetus: a case report. Medicine (Baltimore) 2016; 95 (37) e4721
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Lee SW, Kim MY, Chung JH, Yang JH, Lee YH, Chun YK. Clinical findings of multiple pregnancy with a complete hydatidiform mole and coexisting fetus. J Ultrasound Med 2010; 29 (02) 271-280
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Fishman DA, Padilla LA, Keh P, Cohen L, Frederiksen M, Lurain JR. Management of twin pregnancies consisting of a complete hydatidiform mole and normal fetus. Obstet Gynecol 1998; 91 (04) 546-550
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Ross JA, Unipan A, Clarke J, Magee C, Johns J. Ultrasound diagnosis of molar pregnancy. Ultrasound 2018; 26 (03) 153-159
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar