High-throughput, non-invasive prenatal testing for fetal RHD genotype to guide antenatal prophylaxis with anti-D immunoglobulin: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of high-throughput, non-invasive prenatal testing (HT-NIPT) for fetal RhD genotype to guide antenatal prophylaxis with anti-D immunoglobulin compared to routine antenatal anti-D immunoglobulin prophylaxis (RAADP).

DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness decision-analytic modelling.

SETTING: Primary care.

PARTICIPANTS: A simulated population of 100,000 RhD negative women not known to be sensitised to the RhD antigen.

METHODS: A decision tree model was used to characterise the antenatal care pathway in England and the long-term consequences of sensitisation events. The diagnostic accuracy of HT-NIPT was derived from a systematic review and bivariate meta-analysis; estimates of other inputs were derived from relevant literature sources and databases. Women in whom the HT-NIPT was positive or inconclusive continued to receive RAADP, while women with a negative result received none. Five alternative strategies in which the use of HT-NIPT may affect the existing post-partum care pathway were considered.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Costs expressed in 2015GBP and impact on health outcomes expressed in terms of quality adjusted life years (QALYs) over a lifetime.

RESULTS: The results suggested that HT-NIPT appears cost saving but also less effective than current practice, irrespective of the post-partum strategy evaluated. A post-partum strategy in which inconclusive test results are distinguished from positive results performed best. HT-NIPT is only cost-effective when the overall test cost is £26.60 or less.

CONCLUSIONS: HT-NIPT would reduce unnecessary treatment with routine anti-D immunoglobulin and is cost saving when compared to current practice. The extent of any savings and cost-effectiveness is sensitive to the overall test cost. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Original languageEnglish
JournalBJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology
Early online date7 Feb 2018
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 7 Feb 2018

Bibliographical note

This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details


  • Journal Article

Cite this