| Literature DB >> 24914406 |
Boris T Wang1, Thomas P Chong1, Fatih Z Boyar1, Kimberly A Kopita1, Leslie P Ross1, Mohamed M El-Naggar1, Trilochan Sahoo1, Jia-Chi Wang1, Morteza Hemmat1, Mary H Haddadin1, Renius Owen1, Arturo L Anguiano1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cytogenetic evaluation of products of conception (POC) for chromosomal abnormalities is central to determining the cause of pregnancy loss. We compared the test success rates in various specimen types and the frequencies of chromosomal abnormalities detected by G-banding analysis with those found by Oligo-SNP chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA). We evaluated the benefit of CMA testing in cases of failed culture growth.Entities:
Keywords: CMA; G-banding; Maternal deciduous tissue; POC; Placental villi; UPD
Year: 2014 PMID: 24914406 PMCID: PMC4049495 DOI: 10.1186/1755-8166-7-33
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mol Cytogenet ISSN: 1755-8166 Impact factor: 2.009
Figure 1Placental villi before cleaning (400x magnification). Please note that there is a piece of maternal deciduous tissue attached to the villi (at the upper center).
Figure 2Placental villi after cleaning (400x magnification).
Frequency of chromosome abnormalities in POC with abnormal karyotypes (n = 1872)
| | |
| Autosomal trisomy | 1236 (66%) |
| Autosomal monosomy | 19 (1%) |
| 45, X | 243 (13%) |
| 262 (14%) | |
| 75 (4%) | |
| 37 (2%) |
Figure 3Autosomal trisomies (n = 1241) breakdown by chromosome.
The Oligo-SNP CMA results obtained from the 268 clinical cases
| | | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19 | 1(a) | 4(b) | 0 | 24 | ||
| 1(c) | 7 | 0 | 0 | 8 | ||
| 55 | 30(d) | 5 | 17 | 107 | ||
| 58 | 49(e) | 11 | 11 | 129 | ||
| 133 | 87 | 20 | 28 | 268 | ||
(a) arr[hg19] 1p36.33p36.21(849,466-15,970,926)x1, 10q26.2q26.3(129,968,527-135,427,143)x3.
(b) arr[hg19] 1q21.1(145,368,364-145,829,474)x1, 2p16.3(50,909,653-50,971,464)x1.
arr[hg19]2q37.1(233,859,442-234,137,615)x3, 3q28q29(191,860,743-92,468,987)x1.
arr[hg19]Xq28(154,120,734-154,565,718)x2 (male).
arr[hg19]1p32.3(55,085,169-55,338,679)x3.
(c) 45,XX,der(14;15)(q10;q10).
(d) One case with segmental UPD 16
[arr[hg19] 16p13.3p12.3(89,560-20,228,889)x2 hmz,
16q21q23.3(62,222,293-83,741,752)x2 hmz].
(e) One case with a Xp21.1 deletion, trisomy 16, and mosaic segmental UPD 18.
[ arr[hg19] Xp21.1(31,746,498-31,987,991)x1,(16)x3,(18)x2-3,
18p11.31q12.1(5,218,469-29,237,765)hmz, 18q21.31q23(55,397,870-78,014,582)hmz].
*VOUS – Variant of unknown significance.
Figure 4A case with segmental UPD 16 was detected by Oligo-SNP CMA.
Figure 5A case with a Xp21.1 deletion, trisomy 16 and mosaic segmental UPD 18 was detected by Oligo-SNP CMA.