Skip to main content
Open Forum Infectious Diseases logoLink to Open Forum Infectious Diseases
. 2018 Feb 17;5(3):ofy043. doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofy043

Risk-Based Hepatitis C Screening in Pregnancy Is Less Reliable Than Universal Screening: A Retrospective Chart Review

Sarah Boudova 1,, Katrina Mark 2, Samer S El-Kamary 3
PMCID: PMC5846293  PMID: 29564364

Abstract

Current guidelines recommend only hepatitis C virus (HCV) risk-based screening during pregnancy. We examined screening practices at a major medical center and found inconsistent risk-based screening and the presence of HCV among women with no known risk factors. We make a case for the implementation of universal HCV screening during pregnancy.

Keywords: hepatitis C virus, pregnancy, risk factors, universal screening


Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality, causing liver cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, and death [1]. The global prevalence of HCV is estimated to be 1.0% (95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.8%–1.1%) in 2015, corresponding to 71.1 million (62.5–79.4 million) infections [2]. In the United States, approximately 3.5 million individuals are infected, and this number is likely to climb given the current opioid epidemic [3]. In the United States, 1%–2.5% of pregnant women are infected with HCV with a 6% risk of vertical transmission [3, 4]. HCV during pregnancy is associated with fetal growth restriction, low birthweight, vertical transmission, and gestational hypertension [5]. Current national guidelines recommend only risk-based screening during pregnancy and subsequent screening of children born to HCV-infected mothers [6, 7]. Risk factors include intravenous drug use (IVDU), transplant or blood transfusions before 1992, long-term hemodialysis, tattoos and piercings, and receipt of clotting factors or IgG before 1987 [8]. However, many women are unaware of their HCV status and may withhold information about HCV risk factors. Previous work by our group in Egypt showed that risk-based screening missed 10% of chronically infected pregnant women [9]. Our study was conducted at the University of Maryland Medical Center (UMMC) in Baltimore, a city where 26 000 to 40 000 individuals are infected with HCV [10]. We aimed to determine the proportion of women tested for HCV during pregnancy, the prevalence of HCV among women being tested, and the association between testing and risk factors for HCV during pregnancy.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective secondary data analysis using electronic medical records (EMRs) of pregnant women presenting to UMMC for antenatal care from January 1 to December 31, 2016. A list of women presenting for antenatal care was generated by a Current Procedural Terminology code query, and their EMR records were examined. Visits reviewed included their first antenatal visit until termination of pregnancy, delivery, cessation of care at UMMC, or December 31, 2016, whichever came first. Records from outside hospitals and outpatient clinics were not reviewed. Some women had more than 1 pregnancy that began or ended in 2016. Each pregnancy was considered individually in analysis.

Data were collected from the problem list and medical notes on the number of antenatal visits at UMMC, history of IVDU, transplant, or blood transfusions before 1992, long-term hemodialysis, tattoos, piercings, and receipt of clotting factors or IgG before 1987, and whether each mother was tested for HCV. Our definition of HCV testing was any testing for anti-HCV antibodies and qualitative or quantitative HCV RNA. Among women tested for HCV, additional information was gathered on their HCV status, whether they were diagnosed during this pregnancy, and whether they previously had a diagnosed HCV infection.

Means, standard deviations, and proportions were calculated using Microsoft Excel 2013. Associations between HCV testing and risk factors were calculated using 2-tailed Fisher exact tests.

The University of Maryland, Baltimore, Institutional Review Board formally reviewed this study and determined the analysis of this de-identified data set to be exempt.

RESULTS

Medical records from 1426 pregnancies were reviewed. On average women had 6.6 (SD, 4.8) prenatal visits at UMMC. Of the 1426 pregnancies, 100 (7.0%) were tested for HCV. None of the women had received clotting factors or IgG before 1987, or had a transplant or blood transfusion prior to 1992. Forty pregnancies occurred in women with a history of IVDU, 35 occurred in women with HIV, 6 occurred in women with tattoos or piercings, and 1 occurred in a woman with long-term hemodialysis (Table 1).

Table 1.

Frequency of HCV Risk Factors Based on Whether or Not Women Were Tested for HCV

Risk Factor Tested for HCV (n = 100), No. (%) Not Tested for HCV (n = 1326), No. (%) P Value
Intravenous drug use 19 (19) 21 (1.6) <.0001
HIV positive 10 (10) 25 (1.9) <.0001
Tattoos or piercings 1 (1) 5 (0.4) .354
Clotting factors or IgG before 1987 0 (0) 0 (0) 1.000
Organ transplant or blood transfusion before 1992 0 (0) 0 (0) 1.000
Long-term hemodialysis 0 (0) 1 (<0.1) 1.000
Any risk factora 28 (28) 50 (3.8) <.0001

Abbreviation: HCV, hepatitis C virus.

aTotal not equal to sum of individual risk factors due to multiple risk factors in some women.

Among 78 pregnancies in women with any risk factor, the majority (50/78, 64.1%) were not tested. Of these 50 women, 17 had a history of IVDU, 22 were HIV+, 5 had tattoos, 1 was on long-term hemodialysis, 1 had previously had a positive HCV test, and 4 had multiple risk factors. The association between having a risk factor and being tested (Table 1) was statistically significant for pregnancies in women with IVDU or with HIV or any risk factor. There was no statistically significant association between having a tattoo/piercing or being on long-term hemodialysis and being tested.

Of the 100 pregnancies in which women were tested for HCV, 10 (10%) were positive (0.7% of the 1426 pregnancies). Eight were women with histories of IVDU (1 was also HIV+). One pregnancy was in a woman who had a tattoo/piercing, and 1 pregnancy (10%) was from a woman with no known risk factors for HCV. Five (50%) of these cases were newly diagnosed during this pregnancy. Among these women, 4 were HIV+ and 1 had no known risk factors. Three women previously known to be HCV positive were not tested this pregnancy (women with a history of HCV were retested for viral load).

DISCUSSION

We found that 7% of pregnant women receiving prenatal care at UMMC were tested for HCV and 5% had risk factors for HCV. However, among women with known HCV risk factors, nearly two-thirds were not screened for HCV. We found that 10% of HCV+ pregnancies occurred in women with no reported risk factor. However, the presence of tattoos or piercings was rarely recorded in the EMR unless the tattoos were extensive, or if piercings could interfere with breastfeeding or vaginal delivery. History of IVDU is likely higher than identified. Women may not divulge prior IVDU due to fear of legal retribution or discrimination from health care providers. For these reasons, we believe that the actual number of women with risk factors was likely higher than reported here. This finding of targeted screening being ineffective is not surprising. Limited efficacy of risk-based screening in baby boomers has led the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to recommend universal screening in those born between 1945 and 1965 [8].

We argue that universal HCV screening should be introduced during pregnancy. Knowledge of HCV status changes how obstetricians manage patients in order to reduce the risk of vertical transmission (eg, avoiding invasive testing and use of fetal scalp electrodes). Universal screening is logistically feasible and can identify new cases of HCV at a time when women regularly encounter the health care system and can be referred for treatment. This approach has been successful for prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV. HIV screening in pregnancy is universal even though HIV-positive mothers account for only 8500 (0.02%) of births per year in the United States [11]. In our sample, 0.7% of the women were HCV-positive, which is likely an underestimation as only 7% were tested. Additionally, HIV treatment is lifelong whereas HCV treatment is a 1-time 12-week curative course that will prevent the woman from transmitting infection to her future children or other adults. Universal HCV screening with repeat screening in the third trimester for high-risk women, as done for HIV, should be implemented.

There has been resistance to HCV screening during pregnancy because of the significant side effects of past treatment with pegylated interferon alpha and ribavirin, and the teratogenic effects of ribavirin. However, new highly effective direct acting antiviral agents are curative, have far fewer side effects, and may be approved for use in pregnancy once clinical trials (www.clinicaltrials.gov #NCT02683005) are completed. Until then, they can be used to treat postpartum women after they have completed breast-feeding.

We were surprised by the number of women screened for HCV with no recorded risk factors. It is possible that busy clinicians did not document risk factors they identified, were not clear about current screening guidelines, or had a high suspicion for HCV despite patient denial of risk factors. It is also likely that some women were tested as part of a hepatitis panel that is often ordered following unexplained elevated liver function tests. Also, despite national guidelines, many clinicians included HCV when patients requested STD screening. Future studies of physician attitudes toward HCV screening may elucidate this.

Our study has several limitations. As this is a retrospective analysis of EMRs, there may be missing data due to insufficient documentation of HCV test results or risk factors; or HCV screening conducted at another center. Our data are from 1 center and may not represent findings at other hospitals or the nation at large, although similar results were found in a prospective study in Cleveland [12]. Finally, we were unable to follow children born to these women and cannot comment on vertical transmission. While future studies would benefit from a multicenter prospective design with standardized protocols for determining HCV risk factors at first antenatal visit and long-term follow-up of mother-infant pairs, we do not believe that this should delay potentially life-saving policy changes.

HCV is a promising target for eradication; it is curable, only transmitted by humans, and has a low infection rate [12]. The largest obstacle is identifying cases—individuals are often unaware of their status and have infrequent contact with the health care system. Universal screening is already being rolled out in baby boomers. Expanding universal screening to pregnancy could be an important tool in HCV control and ultimately eradication.

Acknowledgments

Financial support. This work was supported by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (F30AI114195-01 to S.B.). This work also benefited from a USAID US-Egypt Science and Technology Joint Fund (61225 to S.S.E.K.

Potential conflicts of interest. All authors: no reported conflicts of interest. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed.

References

  • 1. El-Kamary SS, Jhaveri R, Shardell MD. All-cause, liver-related, and non-liver-related mortality among HCV-infected individuals in the general US population. Clin Infect Dis 2011; 53:150–7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Polaris Observatory HCV Collaborators. Global prevalence and genotype distribution of hepatitis C virus infection in 2015: a modelling study. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017; 2:161–76. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Edlin BR, Eckhardt BJ, Shu MA et al. . Toward a more accurate estimate of the prevalence of hepatitis C in the United States. Hepatology 2015; 62:1353–63. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Arshad M, El-Kamary SS, Jhaveri R. Hepatitis C virus infection during pregnancy and the newborn period–are they opportunities for treatment?J Viral Hepat 2011; 18:229–36. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Connell LE, Salihu HM, Salemi JL et al. . Maternal hepatitis B and hepatitis C carrier status and perinatal outcomes. Liver Int 2011; 31:1163–70. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG practice bulletin No. 86: viral hepatitis in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 2007; 110:941–56. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Smith BD, Morgan RL, Beckett GA et al. . Recommendations for the identification of chronic hepatitis C virus infection among persons born during 1945–1965. MMWR Recomm Rep 2012; 61:1–32. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. El-Kamary SS, Hashem M, Saleh DA et al. . Reliability of risk-based screening for hepatitis C virus infection among pregnant women in Egypt. J Infect 2015; 70:512–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. 2014 annual report implementation of hepatitis B and hepatitis C prevention and control in Maryland Health–general article §18–1002 2014. Available at: https://phpa.health.maryland.gov/Documents/Hepatitis-Report-2014.pdf. Accessed 23 September 2017.
  • 10. Pregnant women, infants, and children | gender | HIV by group | HIV/AIDS | CDC 2017. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/group/gender/pregnantwomen/index.html. Accessed 23 September 2017.
  • 11. Waruingi W, Mhanna MJ, Kumar D, Abughali N. Hepatitis C virus universal screening versus risk based selective screening during pregnancy. J Neonatal Perinatal Med 2015; 8:371–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Thomas DL. Global control of hepatitis C: where challenge meets opportunity. Nat Med 2013; 19:850–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Open Forum Infectious Diseases are provided here courtesy of Oxford University Press

RESOURCES