2127. Is Routine TORCH Screening Necessary For Isolated Intrauterine Growth Restriction?


 
 
 Perinatal TORCH infections (Toxoplasma gondii, rubella, cytomegalovirus [CMV], herpes simplex virus [HSV]) cause significant fetal and neonatal morbidity and mortality. While perinatal infections are associated with a variety of clinical manifestations in the fetus, they rarely cause isolated intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR). TORCH screens are often ordered to investigate isolated IUGR, but there is limited evidence to support screening for these infections in the absence of other ultrasound abnormalities.
 
 
 
 A retrospective review of antenatal TORCH testing between January 2014 and December 2018 was carried out at two hospitals in Melbourne, Australia. Records were reviewed to identify indications for testing, serology results, and subsequent antenatal investigations. Neonatal outcomes were also evaluated. Serology performed for stillbirth or pregnancy losses were excluded.
 
 
 
 Medical records of 718 pregnancies were reviewed, representing 760 fetuses. 82.5% of screens were ordered in the third trimester, with 43.5% ordered after 32 weeks gestation.
 TORCH serology was performed for the following indications: isolated IUGR (71.2%), neurological abnormality (6.8%), echogenic bowel (3.4%), and maternal illness (1.7%). Screens ordered for isolated IUGR were positive in 7.4% (95% CI 5.5-10.0%).
 TORCH screening identified 49 positive maternal IgM results (CMV = 34, toxoplasma = 15) Two acute maternal infections during pregnancy were diagnosed (CMV = 1, toxoplasma = 1). Both were identified due to symptomatic maternal illness. There was one confirmed neonatal CMV infection. Eight women did not have follow-up to determine the significance of a positive IgM result. No TORCH screen changed maternal management or neonatal outcomes.
 Rubella IgM was ordered in 83.5% of women who had clearly documented evidence of prior rubella immunity. No acute HSV infections were identified.
 
 
 
 Antenatal TORCH screening for IUGR is of minimal utility and is often performed as a reflex rather than in response to specific clinical syndromes. A more guided approach with selective testing is needed.
 
 
 
 All Authors: No reported disclosures.
