Cargando…

Chromosomal mosaicism detected by karyotyping and chromosomal microarray analysis in prenatal diagnosis

To investigate the incidence and clinical significance of chromosomal mosaicism (CM) in prenatal diagnosis by G‐banding karyotyping and chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA). This is a single‐centre retrospective study of invasive prenatal diagnosis for CM. From 5758 karyotyping results and 6066 CMA...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Yi, Zhong, Mei, Zheng, Dezhong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7810963/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33201576
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jcmm.16080
_version_ 1783637409125105664
author Zhang, Yi
Zhong, Mei
Zheng, Dezhong
author_facet Zhang, Yi
Zhong, Mei
Zheng, Dezhong
author_sort Zhang, Yi
collection PubMed
description To investigate the incidence and clinical significance of chromosomal mosaicism (CM) in prenatal diagnosis by G‐banding karyotyping and chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA). This is a single‐centre retrospective study of invasive prenatal diagnosis for CM. From 5758 karyotyping results and 6066 CMA results, 104 foetal cases with CM were selected and analysed further. In total, 50% (52/104) of foetal cases with CM were affected by ultrasound‐detectable phenotypes. Regardless of whether they were singleton or twin pregnancies, isolated structural defects in one system (51.35%, 19/37 in singletons; 86.67%, 13/15 in twins) and a single soft marker (18.92%, 7/37 in singletons; 13.33%, 2/15 in twins) were the most common ultrasound anomalies. Mosaic autosomal trisomy (19.23%, 20/104) was the most frequent type, and its rate was higher in phenotypic foetuses (28.85%, 15/52) than in non‐phenotypic foetuses (9.62%, 5/52). There was no difference in mosaic fractions between phenotypic and non‐phenotypic foetuses based on specimen sources or overall classification. Discordant mosaic results were observed in 16 cases (15.38%, 16/104) from different specimens or different testing methods. Genetic counselling and clinical management regarding CM in prenatal diagnosis remain challenging due to the variable phenotypes and unclear significance. Greater caution should be used in prenatal counselling, and more comprehensive assays involving serial ultrasound examinations, different specimens or testing methods verifications and follow‐up should be applied.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7810963
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78109632021-01-22 Chromosomal mosaicism detected by karyotyping and chromosomal microarray analysis in prenatal diagnosis Zhang, Yi Zhong, Mei Zheng, Dezhong J Cell Mol Med Original Articles To investigate the incidence and clinical significance of chromosomal mosaicism (CM) in prenatal diagnosis by G‐banding karyotyping and chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA). This is a single‐centre retrospective study of invasive prenatal diagnosis for CM. From 5758 karyotyping results and 6066 CMA results, 104 foetal cases with CM were selected and analysed further. In total, 50% (52/104) of foetal cases with CM were affected by ultrasound‐detectable phenotypes. Regardless of whether they were singleton or twin pregnancies, isolated structural defects in one system (51.35%, 19/37 in singletons; 86.67%, 13/15 in twins) and a single soft marker (18.92%, 7/37 in singletons; 13.33%, 2/15 in twins) were the most common ultrasound anomalies. Mosaic autosomal trisomy (19.23%, 20/104) was the most frequent type, and its rate was higher in phenotypic foetuses (28.85%, 15/52) than in non‐phenotypic foetuses (9.62%, 5/52). There was no difference in mosaic fractions between phenotypic and non‐phenotypic foetuses based on specimen sources or overall classification. Discordant mosaic results were observed in 16 cases (15.38%, 16/104) from different specimens or different testing methods. Genetic counselling and clinical management regarding CM in prenatal diagnosis remain challenging due to the variable phenotypes and unclear significance. Greater caution should be used in prenatal counselling, and more comprehensive assays involving serial ultrasound examinations, different specimens or testing methods verifications and follow‐up should be applied. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-11-17 2021-01 /pmc/articles/PMC7810963/ /pubmed/33201576 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jcmm.16080 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine published by Foundation for Cellular and Molecular Medicine and John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Zhang, Yi
Zhong, Mei
Zheng, Dezhong
Chromosomal mosaicism detected by karyotyping and chromosomal microarray analysis in prenatal diagnosis
title Chromosomal mosaicism detected by karyotyping and chromosomal microarray analysis in prenatal diagnosis
title_full Chromosomal mosaicism detected by karyotyping and chromosomal microarray analysis in prenatal diagnosis
title_fullStr Chromosomal mosaicism detected by karyotyping and chromosomal microarray analysis in prenatal diagnosis
title_full_unstemmed Chromosomal mosaicism detected by karyotyping and chromosomal microarray analysis in prenatal diagnosis
title_short Chromosomal mosaicism detected by karyotyping and chromosomal microarray analysis in prenatal diagnosis
title_sort chromosomal mosaicism detected by karyotyping and chromosomal microarray analysis in prenatal diagnosis
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7810963/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33201576
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jcmm.16080
work_keys_str_mv AT zhangyi chromosomalmosaicismdetectedbykaryotypingandchromosomalmicroarrayanalysisinprenataldiagnosis
AT zhongmei chromosomalmosaicismdetectedbykaryotypingandchromosomalmicroarrayanalysisinprenataldiagnosis
AT zhengdezhong chromosomalmosaicismdetectedbykaryotypingandchromosomalmicroarrayanalysisinprenataldiagnosis