Literature DB >> 29055063

Added value of chromosomal microarray analysis over karyotyping in early pregnancy loss: systematic review and meta-analysis.

M Pauta1, M Grande1, L Rodriguez-Revenga2, E Kolomietz3, A Borrell1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the increased test success rate and incremental yield of chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) over conventional karyotyping in detection of pathogenic copy number variants (CNVs) and variants of unknown significance (VOUS) in early pregnancy loss.
METHOD: This was a systematic review conducted in accordance with PRISMA criteria. All articles identified in PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE and Web of Science, between January 2000 and April 2017, that described CNVs in early pregnancy losses (up to 20 weeks) were included. Risk differences were pooled to estimate the incremental yield of CMA over karyotyping overall, and after stratification. In addition, test success rate, defined as the proportion of informative results, was compared in series in which CMA and karyotyping were performed concurrently.
RESULTS: Twenty-three studies, reporting on 5507 pregnancy losses up to 20 weeks with full data available, met the inclusion criteria for analysis. In the series in which CMA and karyotyping were performed concurrently, CMA showed a significant improvement in success rate, providing informative results in 95% (95% CI, 94-96%) of cases compared with karyotyping in which informative results were provided in 68% (95% CI, 66-70%) of cases. Combined data from reviewed studies revealed that incremental yields of CMA over karyotyping were 2% (95% CI, 1-2%) for pathogenic CNVs and 4% (95% CI, 3-6%) for VOUS. The most common pathogenic CNVs reported were 22q11.21 and 1p36.33 deletion.
CONCLUSION: In comparison with conventional karyotyping, CMA provides a significant increase in test success rate and incremental diagnostic yield in early pregnancy loss.
Copyright © 2017 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Copyright © 2017 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  chromosomal microarray; copy number variants; pregnancy loss; prenatal diagnosis

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29055063     DOI: 10.1002/uog.18929

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0960-7692            Impact factor:   7.299


  12 in total

1.  Diagnostic accuracy and value of chromosomal microarray analysis for chromosomal abnormalities in prenatal detection: A prospective clinical study.

Authors:  Hailong Huang; Yan Wang; Min Zhang; Na Lin; Gang An; Deqin He; Meihuan Chen; Lingji Chen; Liangpu Xu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2021-05-21       Impact factor: 1.817

2.  Copy number variation sequencing combined with quantitative fluorescence polymerase chain reaction in clinical application of pregnancy loss.

Authors:  Lin Chen; Li Wang; Feng Tang; Yang Zeng; Daishu Yin; Cong Zhou; Hongmei Zhu; Linping Li; Lili Zhang; Jing Wang
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2021-05-30       Impact factor: 3.357

3.  Maternal plasma genome-wide cell-free DNA can detect fetal aneuploidy in early and recurrent pregnancy loss and can be used to direct further workup.

Authors:  Yuval Yaron; Montse Pauta; Celia Badenas; Anna Soler; Virginia Borobio; Carmen Illanes; Fernanda Paz-Y-Miño; Raigam Martinez-Portilla; Antoni Borrell
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2020-05-01       Impact factor: 6.918

4.  Implication of Genetic Testing and Pregnancy Outcome in a Woman with Unbalanced Translocation t(1;6).

Authors:  Marija Jurčenko; Madara Auzenbaha; Ieva Mičule; Ieva Grīnfelde; Aigars Dzalbs; Ieva Mālniece
Journal:  Am J Case Rep       Date:  2022-02-22

5.  Factors associated with fetal karyotype in spontaneous abortion: a case-case study.

Authors:  Qinghua Xu; Ying Chan; Yun Feng; Baosheng Zhu; Bicheng Yang; Shu Zhu; Lingyun Su; Li Zou; Na Feng; Yan Li
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2022-04-14       Impact factor: 3.105

6.  Follow-up in Patients With Non-invasive Prenatal Screening Failures: A Reflection on the Choice of Further Prenatal Diagnosis.

Authors:  Sha Liu; Hongqian Liu; Jianlong Liu; Ting Bai; Xiaosha Jing; Tianyu Xia; Cechuan Deng; Yunyun Liu; Jing Cheng; Xiang Wei; Lingling Xing; Yuan Luo; Quanfang Zhou; Qian Zhu
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2021-05-19       Impact factor: 4.599

7.  Analysis of Chromosomal Copy Number in First-Trimester Pregnancy Loss Using Next-Generation Sequencing.

Authors:  Lei Fan; Jianli Wu; Yuanyuan Wu; Xinwei Shi; Xing Xin; Shufang Li; Wanjiang Zeng; Dongrui Deng; Ling Feng; Suhua Chen; Juan Xiao
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2020-10-20       Impact factor: 4.599

Review 8.  Chances and Challenges of New Genetic Screening Technologies (NIPT) in Prenatal Medicine from a Clinical Perspective: A Narrative Review.

Authors:  Ivonne Bedei; Aline Wolter; Axel Weber; Fabrizio Signore; Roland Axt-Fliedner
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2021-03-29       Impact factor: 4.096

9.  Economic impact of using maternal plasma cell-free DNA testing to guide further workup in recurrent pregnancy loss.

Authors:  Siyang Peng; Sucheta Bhatt; Antoni Borrell; Yuval Yaron
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2021-05-24       Impact factor: 3.050

10.  Effectiveness of Chromosomal Microarray Analysis for Prenatal Diagnosis of Fetal Echogenic Intracardiac Focus: A Single-Center Experience.

Authors:  Hailong Huang; Meiying Cai; Linyu Liu; Liangpu Xu; Na Lin
Journal:  Int J Gen Med       Date:  2021-05-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.