Literature DB >> 31475188

The assessment of combined karyotype analysis and chromosomal microarray in pregnant women of advanced maternal age: a multicenter study.

Ye Shi1, Jun Ma2, Ying Xue2, Jing Wang1, Bin Yu1, Ting Wang2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Retrospectively analyzed the results of prenatal diagnosis and hoped to provide scientific clinical guidance of prenatal screening and diagnosis for the women in advanced maternal age (AMA).
METHODS: In total, 4,224 women of AMA who accepted prenatal diagnosis by amniocentesis (AC) from two prenatal diagnosis centers were recruited for this study. After genetic counseling and informed consent, 3,475 women received karyotype analysis only, 703 were examined by both karyotype analysis and chromosomal microarray (CMA), while 46 cases selected CMA only. Both centers used the same detection platform, experimental scheme, and quality control standards.
RESULTS: A total of 164 women with chromosomal abnormal results were found, the abnormality rate was 3.88% (164/4,224). Among them, 145 (3.4%, 145/4,224) cases were detected as abnormal chromosome number, 19 cases (0.4%, 19/4,224) as abnormal chromosome structure. Compared with simple AMA women, the abnormality rate was significantly increased in the AMA women who combined with other indications, particularly in number abnormalities (22.5% vs. 1.0%, P<0.001). Forty-eight copy number variations (CNVs) were detected, moreover 10 cases (0.24%, 10/4,224) were proved as pathogenic or likely pathogenic CNVs. With the CMA technology, the rate of additional abnormalities with clinical significance was 1.42% (10/703). Chromosome number abnormalities significantly increased with age (P<0.001), while there were no such trends in chromosomal structural abnormalities (P=0.624).
CONCLUSIONS: About 3.88% fetuses of AMA women had chromosomal abnormalities, the abnormality rate increased with their age. The application of CMA could increase the diagnostic rate by about 1.4% for AMA women, and greatly reduce their tension.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Advanced maternal age (AMA); chromosomal microarray (CMA); karyotype analysis; prenatal diagnosis; prenatal screening

Year:  2019        PMID: 31475188      PMCID: PMC6694271          DOI: 10.21037/atm.2019.06.63

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Transl Med        ISSN: 2305-5839


  27 in total

1.  Advanced maternal age--how old is too old?

Authors:  Linda J Heffner
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2004-11-04       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  [Effects of maternal age on pregnancy: a retrospective cohort study].

Authors:  Xiaoli Liu; Liying Zou; Yi Chen; Yan Ruan; Yajun Liu; Weiyuan Zhang
Journal:  Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi       Date:  2014-07-01

3.  Prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal abnormalities in fetuses with abnormal cardiac ultrasound findings: evaluation of chromosomal microarray-based analysis.

Authors:  I Mademont-Soler; C Morales; A Soler; J M Martínez-Crespo; Y Shen; E Margarit; N Clusellas; M Obón; B L Wu; A Sánchez
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2013-03-04       Impact factor: 7.299

Review 4.  Prenatal chromosomal microarray analysis in a diagnostic laboratory; experience with >1000 cases and review of the literature.

Authors:  Amy Breman; Amber N Pursley; Patricia Hixson; Weimin Bi; Patricia Ward; Carlos A Bacino; Chad Shaw; James R Lupski; Arthur Beaudet; Ankita Patel; Sau W Cheung; Ignatia Van den Veyver
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 3.050

5.  Chromosomal microarray versus karyotyping for prenatal diagnosis.

Authors:  Ronald J Wapner; Christa Lese Martin; Brynn Levy; Blake C Ballif; Christine M Eng; Julia M Zachary; Melissa Savage; Lawrence D Platt; Daniel Saltzman; William A Grobman; Susan Klugman; Thomas Scholl; Joe Leigh Simpson; Kimberly McCall; Vimla S Aggarwal; Brian Bunke; Odelia Nahum; Ankita Patel; Allen N Lamb; Elizabeth A Thom; Arthur L Beaudet; David H Ledbetter; Lisa G Shaffer; Laird Jackson
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2012-12-06       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Trends in prenatal screening and diagnostic testing among women referred for advanced maternal age.

Authors:  Naomi Nakata; Yuemei Wang; Sucheta Bhatt
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 3.050

7.  Clinical and cytogenetic results of a large series of amniocentesis cases from Turkey: report of 6124 cases.

Authors:  Zeynep Ocak; Tülay Özlü; Hasan Fehmi Yazıcıoğlu; Osman Özyurt; Mehmet Aygün
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol Res       Date:  2013-09-05       Impact factor: 1.730

8.  Prenatal diagnostic testing among women referred for advanced maternal age in Beijing, 2001-2012.

Authors:  Jingmei Ma; Pan Hong; Jie Fu; Li Yu; Huixia Yang
Journal:  Int J Gynaecol Obstet       Date:  2014-02-13       Impact factor: 3.561

9.  ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 88, December 2007. Invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy.

Authors: 
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 7.661

10.  Maternal age-specific rates of fetal chromosomal abnormalities in Korean pregnant women of advanced maternal age.

Authors:  Young Joo Kim; Jee Eun Lee; Soo Hyun Kim; Sung Shin Shim; Dong Hyun Cha
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol Sci       Date:  2013-05-16
View more
  7 in total

1.  Prenatal Diagnosis Using Chromosomal Microarray Analysis in High-Risk Pregnancies.

Authors:  Ching-Hua Hsiao; Jia-Shing Chen; Yu-Ming Shiao; Yann-Jang Chen; Ching-Hsuan Chen; Woei-Chyn Chu; Yi-Cheng Wu
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-06-23       Impact factor: 4.964

2.  Clinical evaluation of non-invasive prenatal screening for the detection of fetal genome-wide copy number variants.

Authors:  Wenli Wang; Fengying Lu; Bin Zhang; Qin Zhou; Yingping Chen; Bin Yu
Journal:  Orphanet J Rare Dis       Date:  2022-07-08       Impact factor: 4.303

3.  Clinical Utility of SNP Array Analysis in Prenatal Diagnosis: A Cohort Study of 5000 Pregnancies.

Authors:  Jingjing Xiang; Yang Ding; Xiaoyan Song; Jun Mao; Minjuan Liu; Yinghua Liu; Chao Huang; Qin Zhang; Ting Wang
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2020-11-06       Impact factor: 4.599

4.  Prenatal Diagnostic Testing Following High-Risk Result from Serological Screening: Which Shall We Select?

Authors:  Jing Wang; Xin-Xin Tang; Qin Zhou; Shuting Yang; Ye Shi; Bin Yu; Bin Zhang; Lei-Lei Wang
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2021-09-22

5.  The Necessity of Prenatal Diagnosis by CMA for the Women with NIPS-Positive Results.

Authors:  Jun Xu; Ying Xue; Jing Wang; Qin Zhou; Bin Zhang; Bin Yu; Ting Wang
Journal:  Int J Genomics       Date:  2020-08-29       Impact factor: 2.326

6.  The difference between karyotype analysis and chromosome microarray for mosaicism of aneuploid chromosomes in prenatal diagnosis.

Authors:  MengZhe Hao; LeiLei Li; Han Zhang; LinLin Li; Ruizhi Liu; Yang Yu
Journal:  J Clin Lab Anal       Date:  2020-08-30       Impact factor: 3.124

7.  Comprehensive Evaluation of Non-invasive Prenatal Screening to Detect Fetal Copy Number Variations.

Authors:  Jing Wang; Bin Zhang; Lingna Zhou; Qin Zhou; Yingping Chen; Bin Yu
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2021-07-16       Impact factor: 4.599

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.