Cargando…

ACOG and SMFM guidelines for prenatal diagnosis: Is karyotyping really sufficient?

OBJECTIVE: The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and Society for Maternal‐Fetal Medicine (SMFM) recommend chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) for prenatal diagnosis in cases with 1 or more fetal structural abnormalities. For patients who elect prenatal diagnosis and have a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hay, Sara B., Sahoo, Trilochan, Travis, Mary K., Hovanes, Karine, Dzidic, Natasa, Doherty, Charles, Strecker, Michelle N.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5900922/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29315677
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pd.5212
_version_ 1783314507405197312
author Hay, Sara B.
Sahoo, Trilochan
Travis, Mary K.
Hovanes, Karine
Dzidic, Natasa
Doherty, Charles
Strecker, Michelle N.
author_facet Hay, Sara B.
Sahoo, Trilochan
Travis, Mary K.
Hovanes, Karine
Dzidic, Natasa
Doherty, Charles
Strecker, Michelle N.
author_sort Hay, Sara B.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and Society for Maternal‐Fetal Medicine (SMFM) recommend chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) for prenatal diagnosis in cases with 1 or more fetal structural abnormalities. For patients who elect prenatal diagnosis and have a structurally normal fetus, either microarray or karyotype is recommended. This study evaluates the frequency of clinically significant chromosomal abnormalities (CSCA) that would have been missed if all patients offered the choice between CMA and karyotyping chose karyotyping. METHODS: A total of 3223 prenatal samples undergoing CMA were evaluated. Cases were categorized into 2 groups: those that met ACOG guidelines for CMA versus those that met ACOG guidelines for either CMA or karyotype. RESULTS: Of the 3223 cases, 1475 (45.8%) met ACOG recommendations for CMA, and 1748 (54.2%) met recommendations for either CMA or karyotype. In patients who could have elected either CMA or karyotype, 2.5% had CSCA that would have been missed if the patient had elected to pursue karyotype. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that 2.5% of patients will have a CSCA that may be missed if the guidelines continue to suggest that CMA and karyotyping have equivalent diagnostic value for patients without a fetal structural abnormality.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5900922
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59009222018-04-23 ACOG and SMFM guidelines for prenatal diagnosis: Is karyotyping really sufficient? Hay, Sara B. Sahoo, Trilochan Travis, Mary K. Hovanes, Karine Dzidic, Natasa Doherty, Charles Strecker, Michelle N. Prenat Diagn Original Articles OBJECTIVE: The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and Society for Maternal‐Fetal Medicine (SMFM) recommend chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) for prenatal diagnosis in cases with 1 or more fetal structural abnormalities. For patients who elect prenatal diagnosis and have a structurally normal fetus, either microarray or karyotype is recommended. This study evaluates the frequency of clinically significant chromosomal abnormalities (CSCA) that would have been missed if all patients offered the choice between CMA and karyotyping chose karyotyping. METHODS: A total of 3223 prenatal samples undergoing CMA were evaluated. Cases were categorized into 2 groups: those that met ACOG guidelines for CMA versus those that met ACOG guidelines for either CMA or karyotype. RESULTS: Of the 3223 cases, 1475 (45.8%) met ACOG recommendations for CMA, and 1748 (54.2%) met recommendations for either CMA or karyotype. In patients who could have elected either CMA or karyotype, 2.5% had CSCA that would have been missed if the patient had elected to pursue karyotype. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that 2.5% of patients will have a CSCA that may be missed if the guidelines continue to suggest that CMA and karyotyping have equivalent diagnostic value for patients without a fetal structural abnormality. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018-02-06 2018-02 /pmc/articles/PMC5900922/ /pubmed/29315677 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pd.5212 Text en 2018 The Authors. Prenatal Diagnosis Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Hay, Sara B.
Sahoo, Trilochan
Travis, Mary K.
Hovanes, Karine
Dzidic, Natasa
Doherty, Charles
Strecker, Michelle N.
ACOG and SMFM guidelines for prenatal diagnosis: Is karyotyping really sufficient?
title ACOG and SMFM guidelines for prenatal diagnosis: Is karyotyping really sufficient?
title_full ACOG and SMFM guidelines for prenatal diagnosis: Is karyotyping really sufficient?
title_fullStr ACOG and SMFM guidelines for prenatal diagnosis: Is karyotyping really sufficient?
title_full_unstemmed ACOG and SMFM guidelines for prenatal diagnosis: Is karyotyping really sufficient?
title_short ACOG and SMFM guidelines for prenatal diagnosis: Is karyotyping really sufficient?
title_sort acog and smfm guidelines for prenatal diagnosis: is karyotyping really sufficient?
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5900922/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29315677
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pd.5212
work_keys_str_mv AT haysarab acogandsmfmguidelinesforprenataldiagnosisiskaryotypingreallysufficient
AT sahootrilochan acogandsmfmguidelinesforprenataldiagnosisiskaryotypingreallysufficient
AT travismaryk acogandsmfmguidelinesforprenataldiagnosisiskaryotypingreallysufficient
AT hovaneskarine acogandsmfmguidelinesforprenataldiagnosisiskaryotypingreallysufficient
AT dzidicnatasa acogandsmfmguidelinesforprenataldiagnosisiskaryotypingreallysufficient
AT dohertycharles acogandsmfmguidelinesforprenataldiagnosisiskaryotypingreallysufficient
AT streckermichellen acogandsmfmguidelinesforprenataldiagnosisiskaryotypingreallysufficient