4.6 Review

Additional information from array comparative genomic hybridization technology over conventional karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

期刊

ULTRASOUND IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
卷 37, 期 1, 页码 6-14

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/uog.7754

关键词

array CGH; prenatal diagnosis; ultrasound abnormalities

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective Array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) is transforming clinical cytogenetics with its ability to interrogate the human genome at increasingly high resolution. The aim of this study was to determine whether array CGH testing in the prenatal population provides diagnostic information over conventional karyotyping. Methods MEDLINE (1970 to December 2009), EMBASE (1980 to December 2009) and CINAHL (1982 to December 2009) databases were searched electronically. Studies were selected if array CGH was used on prenatal samples or if array CGH was used on postnatal samples following termination of pregnancy for structural abnormalities that were detected on an ultrasound scan. Of the 135 potential articles, 10 were included in this systematic review and eight were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled rate of extra information detected by array CGH when the prenatal karyotype was normal was meta-analyzed using a random-effects model. The pooled rate of receiving an array CGH result of unknown significance was also meta-analyzed. Results Array CGH detected 3.6% (95% CI, 1.5-8.5) additional genomic imbalances when conventional karyotyping was 'normal', regardless of referral indication. This increased to 5.2% (95% CI, 1.9-13.9) more than karyotyping when the referral indication was a structural malformation on ultrasound. Conclusions There appears to be an increased detection rate of chromosomal imbalances, compared with conventional karyotyping, when array CGH techniques are employed in the prenatal population. However, some are copy number imbalances that are not clinically significant. This carries implications for prenatal counseling and maternal anxiety. Copyright (C) 2010 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据