OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical utility of fluorescence in-situ hybridisation with chromosomes 13, 18, 21, X and Y as a stand-alone test in detecting chromosomal abnormalities, and the types of chromosomal abnormalities missed. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. SETTING: A restructured Government hospital in Singapore and an academic hospital in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Cytogenetic data of prenatal specimens and results of fluorescence in-situ hybridisation of 5883 patients performed between January 2000 and August 2007 were reviewed. RESULTS: Fluorescence in-situ hybridisation detected 558 (9.5%) patients with chromosomal abnormalities. Abnormal ultrasounds (70%) and maternal serum screens (21%) were the most indicative of chromosomal abnormalities. When comparing fluorescence in-situ hybridisation data with karyotype results for the five chromosomes of interest, the sensitivity and specificity were 99.3% and 99.9%, respectively. When comparing fluorescence in-situ hybridisation data with karyotype results for all chromosomes, the sensitivity decreased to 86.8%, whereas the specificity remained at 99.9%. Of 643 cases with karyotype abnormalities, 85 were fluorescence in-situ hybridisation-negative (false negative rate, 13.2%), which included structural rearrangements, chromosome mosaicism, and other trisomies. Despite abnormal ultrasound indications, fluorescence in-situ hybridisation missed 32 cases which included structural rearrangements, mosaicisms, and other trisomies. CONCLUSION: This study does not support fluorescence in-situ hybridisation as a stand-alone test. Institutions supporting fluorescence in-situ hybridisation as a stand-alone test must seriously consider the risks of a missed diagnosis.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical utility of fluorescence in-situ hybridisation with chromosomes 13, 18, 21, X and Y as a stand-alone test in detecting chromosomal abnormalities, and the types of chromosomal abnormalities missed. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. SETTING: A restructured Government hospital in Singapore and an academic hospital in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Cytogenetic data of prenatal specimens and results of fluorescence in-situ hybridisation of 5883 patients performed between January 2000 and August 2007 were reviewed. RESULTS: Fluorescence in-situ hybridisation detected 558 (9.5%) patients with chromosomal abnormalities. Abnormal ultrasounds (70%) and maternal serum screens (21%) were the most indicative of chromosomal abnormalities. When comparing fluorescence in-situ hybridisation data with karyotype results for the five chromosomes of interest, the sensitivity and specificity were 99.3% and 99.9%, respectively. When comparing fluorescence in-situ hybridisation data with karyotype results for all chromosomes, the sensitivity decreased to 86.8%, whereas the specificity remained at 99.9%. Of 643 cases with karyotype abnormalities, 85 were fluorescence in-situ hybridisation-negative (false negative rate, 13.2%), which included structural rearrangements, chromosome mosaicism, and other trisomies. Despite abnormal ultrasound indications, fluorescence in-situ hybridisation missed 32 cases which included structural rearrangements, mosaicisms, and other trisomies. CONCLUSION: This study does not support fluorescence in-situ hybridisation as a stand-alone test. Institutions supporting fluorescence in-situ hybridisation as a stand-alone test must seriously consider the risks of a missed diagnosis.
Authors: Antina de Jong; Wybo J Dondorp; Daniëlle R M Timmermans; Jan M M van Lith; Guido M W R de Wert Journal: Eur J Hum Genet Date: 2011-06-01 Impact factor: 4.246
Authors: Antina de Jong; Wybo J Dondorp; Suzanna G M Frints; Christine E M de Die-Smulders; Guido M W R de Wert Journal: Nat Rev Genet Date: 2011-08-18 Impact factor: 53.242