Literature DB >> 33674646

Detection of copy number variation associated with ventriculomegaly in fetuses using single nucleotide polymorphism arrays.

Huili Xue1, Aili Yu2, Na Lin3, Xuemei Chen3, Min Lin3, Yan Wang3, Hailong Huang4, Liangpu Xu5.   

Abstract

Etiopathogenesis of fetal ventriculomegaly is poorly understood. Associations between fetal isolated ventriculomegaly and copy number variations (CNVs) have been previously described. We investigated the correlations between fetal ventriculomegaly-with or without other ultrasound anomalies-and chromosome abnormalities. 222 fetuses were divided into four groups: (I) 103 (46.4%) cases with isolated ventriculomegaly, (II) 41 (18.5%) cases accompanied by soft markers, (III) 33 (14.9%) cases complicated with central nervous system (CNS) anomalies, and (IV) 45 (20.3%) cases with accompanying anomalies. Karyotyping and single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) array were used in parallel. Karyotype abnormalities were identified in 15/222 (6.8%) cases. Karyotype abnormalities in group I, II, III, and IV were 4/103 (3.9%), 2/41 (4.9%), 4/33 (12.1%), and 5/45 (11.1%), respectively. Concerning the SNP array analysis results, 31/222 (14.0%) were CNVs, CNVs in groups I, II, III, and IV were 11/103 (10.7%), 6/41 (14.6%), 9/33 (27.3%), and 5/45 fetuses (11.1%), respectively. Detections of clinical significant CNVs were higher in non-isolated ventriculomegaly than in isolated ventriculomegaly (16.81% vs 10.7%, P = 0.19). SNP arrays can effectively identify CNVs in fetuses with ventriculomegaly and increase the abnormal chromosomal detection rate by approximately 7.2%, especially ventriculomegaly accompanied by CNS anomalies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33674646      PMCID: PMC7935846          DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-83147-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Rep        ISSN: 2045-2322            Impact factor:   4.379


  41 in total

Review 1.  Counseling in isolated mild fetal ventriculomegaly.

Authors:  K Melchiorre; A Bhide; A D Gika; G Pilu; A T Papageorghiou
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 7.299

Review 2.  Use of prenatal chromosomal microarray: prospective cohort study and systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  S C Hillman; D J McMullan; G Hall; F S Togneri; N James; E J Maher; C H Meller; D Williams; R J Wapner; E R Maher; M D Kilby
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2013-05-07       Impact factor: 7.299

3.  High-resolution chromosomal microarrays in prenatal diagnosis significantly increase diagnostic power.

Authors:  Beatrice Oneda; Rosa Baldinger; Regina Reissmann; Irina Reshetnikova; Pavel Krejci; Rahim Masood; Nicole Ochsenbein-Kölble; Deborah Bartholdi; Katharina Steindl; Denise Morotti; Marzia Faranda; Alessandra Baumer; Reza Asadollahi; Pascal Joset; Dunja Niedrist; Christian Breymann; Gundula Hebisch; Margaret Hüsler; René Mueller; Elke Prentl; Josef Wisser; Roland Zimmermann; Anita Rauch
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2014-03-21       Impact factor: 3.050

4.  Further molecular and clinical delineation of the Wisconsin syndrome phenotype associated with interstitial 3q24q25 deletions.

Authors:  Marjolein H Willemsen; Nicole de Leeuw; Catherine Mercer; Helen Eisenhauer; Joanne Morris; Morag N Collinson; John C K Barber; Stephen T S Lam; Ivan F M Lo; Hanneke Rensen; Annemarie Ferwerda; Ben C J Hamel; Tjitske Kleefstra
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2010-12-15       Impact factor: 2.802

Review 5.  Sotos syndrome 1 and 2.

Authors:  Juan F Sotos
Journal:  Pediatr Endocrinol Rev       Date:  2014-09

6.  Epidemiology, natural history, progression, and postnatal outcome of severe fetal ventriculomegaly.

Authors:  Therese Hannon; Peter W G Tennant; Judith Rankin; Stephen C Robson
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 7.661

7.  A 6.5 mb deletion at 3q24q25.2 narrows Wisconsin syndrome critical region to a 750 kb interval: A potential role for MBNLI.

Authors:  Veronica Bertini; Alessandro Orsini; Roberta Mazza; Vineela Mandava; Giuseppe Saggese; Alessia Azzara'; Alice Bonuccelli; Angelo Valetto
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2016-10-18       Impact factor: 2.802

8.  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

9.  Chromosomal microarray analysis as a first-line test in pregnancies with a priori low risk for the detection of submicroscopic chromosomal abnormalities.

Authors:  Francesco Fiorentino; Stefania Napoletano; Fiorina Caiazzo; Mariateresa Sessa; Sara Bono; Letizia Spizzichino; Anthony Gordon; Andrea Nuccitelli; Giuseppe Rizzo; Marina Baldi
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2012-12-05       Impact factor: 4.246

Review 10.  Additional value of prenatal genomic array testing in fetuses with isolated structural ultrasound abnormalities and a normal karyotype: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  M C de Wit; M I Srebniak; L C P Govaerts; D Van Opstal; R J H Galjaard; A T J I Go
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 7.299

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Molecular Approaches in Fetal Malformations, Dynamic Anomalies and Soft Markers: Diagnostic Rates and Challenges-Systematic Review of the Literature and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Gioia Mastromoro; Daniele Guadagnolo; Nader Khaleghi Hashemian; Enrica Marchionni; Alice Traversa; Antonio Pizzuti
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-02-23
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.