4.2 Article

Prenatal Diagnosis of Monosomy 1P36: A Focus on Brain Abnormalities and a Review of the Literature

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL GENETICS PART A
Volume 146A, Issue 23, Pages 3062-3069

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.a.32563

Keywords

chromosome 1; chromosome 20; hydrocephalus; cerebral ventricles; prenatal diagnosis; polymicrogyria; oligonucleotide; array sequence analysis; in situ hybridization; fluorescence; terminal deletion; 1p36

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Monosomy 1p36 is an increasingly recognized chromosomal anomaly. We describe two patients with monosomy 1p36 who had brain abnormalities detected on prenatal ultrasound. The first patient was ascertained prenatally with ultrasound abnormalities, including ventriculomegaly, a single umbilical artery, a unilateral club foot, a ventricular septal defect, and intra-uterine growth retardation. Aminocentesis showed a normal karyotype. A postnatal MRI showed moderate to severe non-obstuctive myelination of the anterior limb of the internal capsule. A postnatal karyotype demonstrated a deletion of 1p36.3 that was detected prenatally due to low resolution. Molecular studies by array comparative genome hybridization (CGH) identified a terminal deletion of similar to 10 Mb. Our second patient was a fetus who had brain abnormalities suggestive of holoprosencephaly identified on prenatal ultrasound. Amniocentesis showed 46,XX,der(1)t(1;20)(p36.1;p12.2), that was found to be maternally inherited. Fetal autopsy demonstrated hydrocephalus, focal polymicrogyria, and cerebellar hypoplasia. However, holoprosencephaly was not confirmed. In addition to describing tow patients with monosomy 1p36 who had abnormal brain anatomy on prenatal ultrasounds, we review the literature of other prenatally detected patients with monosomy 1p36 and review brain abnormalities seen both prenatally and postnatally. (C) 2008 Wiley-Leiss, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available