Abstract
Abstract
Background
Several different technologies are used for prenatal screening procedures and genetic diagnostic technologies. We aimed to investigate the rates of chromosomal abnormalities in cases with different abnormal prenatal indications and to determine the relationships between fetal chromosomal abnormalities and indicators of prenatal abnormalities in Northeast China.
Methods
We evaluated 4953 16- to 23-week singleton gestation cases using amniocentesis and a total of 3583 participants received serological screening. Fetal chromosomal analyses were performed for all samples using fluorescence in situ hybridization and karyotyping.
Results
Among these samples, 204 (4.12%) had fetal chromosomal abnormalities. A total of 3583 participants received serological screening, among whom 102 (2.85%) exhibited positive results. A total of 309 participants had ultrasonography; 42 (13.6%) of these had abnormalities. Among 97 participants who had non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT), 59 (61%) had positive results. Among 1265 participants with advanced maternal age, 78 (6.2%) had abnormal results.
Conclusion
The serological screening and NIPT that were included in the prenatal screening methods all had false positive and false negative rates. Although they are both prenatal screening techniques, maternal serum screening cannot be replaced by NIPT. The pregnancy women should accept NIPT in a qualified prenatal diagnostic center. We recommend that pregnant women at high or critical risk undergoing prenatal screening should confirm the fetal karyotype through amniocentesis. Moreover, if women receive a positive result via NIPT, they should not have a pregnancy termination without undergoing further prenatal diagnosis.
Funder
“Thirteenth Five-Year” Science and Technology Program of Jilin Provincial Education department
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Biochemistry (medical),Genetics (clinical),Genetics,Molecular Biology,Molecular Medicine,Biochemistry
Reference42 articles.
1. Sheth F, Rahman M, Liehr T, Desai M, Patel B, Modi C, et al. Prenatal screening of cytogenetic anomalies-a Western Indian experience. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2015;15:90.
2. Zhang L, Zhang XH, Liang MY, Ren MH. Prenatal cytogenetic diagnosis study of 2782 cases of high-risk pregnant women. Chin Med J (Engl). 2010;123(4):423–30.
3. Grether-González P, Cámara-Polanco V, Ulloa-Avilés V, Salas-Labadia C, Almanza-Márquez R, Kogan-Frenk S, et al. Prenatal diagnosis by amniocentesis. Clinical and cytogenetic experience in 1,500 cases. Ginecol Obstet Mex. 2010;78(9):493–503.
4. Wilson RD, Blight C, Langlois S. Diagnosing chromosomal abnormalities from “big” to “small” with molecular cytogenetic technology. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2009;31(5):414–21.
5. Mann K, Donaghue C, Fox SP, Docherty Z, Ogilvie CM. Strategies for the rapid prenatal diagnosis of chromosome aneuploidy. Eur J Hum Genet. 2004;12(11):907–15.
Cited by
9 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献