Key result
Universal first-trimester serological screening for CMV was superior to high-risk screening and no screening, resulting in fewer QALYs lost (-0.42 vs -0.63 and -0.87).
Why the study?
Congenital cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is a major cause of deafness and neurodevelopmental disability, motivating an assessment of the cost utility of first-trimester serological CMV screening compared to high-risk or no serological screening.
Does universal first-trimester serological screening improve cost utility compared to screening high-risk pregnancies or no screening in pregnant women?
Does universal first-trimester serological screening improve cost utility compared to screening high-risk pregnancies or no screening in pregnant women?
Absolute Event Rate: -0.42% vs -0.87%
Universal first-trimester serological screening for CMV is the most cost-effective strategy for preventing congenital CMV infection.
Universal CMV screening may prove cost-effective in models; leaves open whether guidelines should shift from targeted approaches.
OBJECTIVE: Congenital cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is a major cause of deafness and neurodevelopmental disability in children. Our objective was to assess the cost utility of first-trimester serological CMV screening, compared to screening of high-risk pregnancies and no serological screening. DESIGN: A decision-analytic model was created to compare the cost utility of three strategies from a healthcare sector perspective: universal first-trimester serological screening, screening only of high-risk pregnant women (both including antiviral prophylaxis in cases of primary infection) and serological testing triggered by foetal morphological ultrasound (no CMV serological screening). SETTING: Canada. POPULATION: Hypothetical population of 80 000 pregnant women. METHODS: Probability, expected values and cost estimates were derived from published literature and local hospital and national insurance data. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Cost per maternal and infant quality-adjusted life year (QALY) lost. RESULTS: Universal serological screening was superior to both screening of high-risk women and no screening (utility of -0.42, -0.63 and - 0.87 QALY lost, respectively). Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that universal screening was the most cost-effective strategy regardless of the incidence of primary infection, the acceptability of amniocentesis and the efficacy of antiviral prophylaxis. In the Monte Carlo analyses, universal serological screening was the most cost-effective option in 96.36% of simulations. Universal serological screening would allow detection of 152 cases of primary maternal CMV infection and would prevent 29 cases of congenital CMV infection annually. CONCLUSION: Our findings support the adoption of a population-based prenatal screening programme for the prevention of congenital CMV infection.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Poder et al. (2025) studied Congenital cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection (n=80,000). Universal first-trimester serological screening vs. Screening of high-risk pregnant women and no serological screening was evaluated on Cost per maternal and infant quality-adjusted life year (QALY) lost. Universal first-trimester serological screening for CMV was superior to high-risk screening and no screening, resulting in fewer QALYs lost (-0.42 vs -0.63 and -0.87).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: