Karyotype versus microarray testing for genetic abnormalities after stillbirth - PubMed (original) (raw)
Comparative Study
. 2012 Dec 6;367(23):2185-93.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1201569.
Grier P Page, George R Saade, Robert M Silver, Vanessa R Thorsten, Corette B Parker, Halit Pinar, Marian Willinger, Barbara J Stoll, Josefine Heim-Hall, Michael W Varner, Robert L Goldenberg, Radek Bukowski, Ronald J Wapner, Carolyn D Drews-Botsch, Barbara M O'Brien, Donald J Dudley, Brynn Levy; NICHD Stillbirth Collaborative Research Network
Collaborators, Affiliations
- PMID: 23215556
- PMCID: PMC4295117
- DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1201569
Comparative Study
Karyotype versus microarray testing for genetic abnormalities after stillbirth
Uma M Reddy et al. N Engl J Med. 2012.
Abstract
Background: Genetic abnormalities have been associated with 6 to 13% of stillbirths, but the true prevalence may be higher. Unlike karyotype analysis, microarray analysis does not require live cells, and it detects small deletions and duplications called copy-number variants.
Methods: The Stillbirth Collaborative Research Network conducted a population-based study of stillbirth in five geographic catchment areas. Standardized postmortem examinations and karyotype analyses were performed. A single-nucleotide polymorphism array was used to detect copy-number variants of at least 500 kb in placental or fetal tissue. Variants that were not identified in any of three databases of apparently unaffected persons were then classified into three groups: probably benign, clinical significance unknown, or pathogenic. We compared the results of karyotype and microarray analyses of samples obtained after delivery.
Results: In our analysis of samples from 532 stillbirths, microarray analysis yielded results more often than did karyotype analysis (87.4% vs. 70.5%, P<0.001) and provided better detection of genetic abnormalities (aneuploidy or pathogenic copy-number variants, 8.3% vs. 5.8%; P=0.007). Microarray analysis also identified more genetic abnormalities among 443 antepartum stillbirths (8.8% vs. 6.5%, P=0.02) and 67 stillbirths with congenital anomalies (29.9% vs. 19.4%, P=0.008). As compared with karyotype analysis, microarray analysis provided a relative increase in the diagnosis of genetic abnormalities of 41.9% in all stillbirths, 34.5% in antepartum stillbirths, and 53.8% in stillbirths with anomalies.
Conclusions: Microarray analysis is more likely than karyotype analysis to provide a genetic diagnosis, primarily because of its success with nonviable tissue, and is especially valuable in analyses of stillbirths with congenital anomalies or in cases in which karyotype results cannot be obtained. (Funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.).
Figures
Figure 1. Performance of Karyotype and Microarray Analyses in Samples Obtained after Delivery in 532 Stillbirths
On the left, karyotype results (blue) are categorized as failed, normal, or abnormal, as compared with findings from the same cases on microarray analysis (orange). On the right, the microarray results are categorized as failed, normal, abnormal, or variants of unknown significance (VOUS), with the corresponding karyotype results in the same cases. CNV denotes copy-number variant.
Comment in
- Application of genomic technology in prenatal diagnosis.
Dugoff L. Dugoff L. N Engl J Med. 2012 Dec 6;367(23):2249-51. doi: 10.1056/NEJMe1212303. N Engl J Med. 2012. PMID: 23215562 No abstract available.
Similar articles
- Chromosomal microarray versus karyotyping for prenatal diagnosis.
Wapner RJ, Martin CL, Levy B, Ballif BC, Eng CM, Zachary JM, Savage M, Platt LD, Saltzman D, Grobman WA, Klugman S, Scholl T, Simpson JL, McCall K, Aggarwal VS, Bunke B, Nahum O, Patel A, Lamb AN, Thom EA, Beaudet AL, Ledbetter DH, Shaffer LG, Jackson L. Wapner RJ, et al. N Engl J Med. 2012 Dec 6;367(23):2175-84. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1203382. N Engl J Med. 2012. PMID: 23215555 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial. - Cytogenetic Investigation in 136 Consecutive Stillbirths: Does the Tissue Type Affect the Success Rate of Chromosomal Microarray Analysis and Karyotype?
Marquès B, Benitez L, Peguero A, Madrigal I, Gómez O, Figueras F, Borrell A. Marquès B, et al. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2020;47(4):315-320. doi: 10.1159/000505399. Epub 2020 Jan 17. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2020. PMID: 31955157 - Copy number variants and fetal growth in stillbirths.
Dalton SE, Workalemahu T, Allshouse AA, Page JM, Reddy UM, Saade GR, Pinar H, Goldenberg RL, Dudley DJ, Silver RM. Dalton SE, et al. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2023 May;228(5):579.e1-579.e11. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2022.11.1274. Epub 2022 Nov 8. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2023. PMID: 36356697 Free PMC article. - Prenatal diagnosis by chromosomal microarray analysis.
Levy B, Wapner R. Levy B, et al. Fertil Steril. 2018 Feb;109(2):201-212. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.01.005. Fertil Steril. 2018. PMID: 29447663 Free PMC article. Review. - Chromosomal microarray analysis and prenatal diagnosis.
Lo JO, Shaffer BL, Feist CD, Caughey AB. Lo JO, et al. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2014 Oct;69(10):613-21. doi: 10.1097/OGX.0000000000000119. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2014. PMID: 25336071 Review.
Cited by
- Genetic analysis of pregnancy loss and fetal structural anomalies by whole exome sequencing.
Xiang J, Ding Y, Tang H, Zhang W, Mao J, He Q, Zhang Q, Wang T. Xiang J, et al. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2024 Sep 9;19(1):330. doi: 10.1186/s13023-024-03340-5. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2024. PMID: 39252126 Free PMC article. - Prenatal diagnosis and genetic analysis of small supernumerary marker chromosomes in the eastern chinese han population: A retrospective study of 36 cases.
Jiang X, Liang B, Chen B, Wu X, Wang Y, Lin N, Huang H, Xu L. Jiang X, et al. Chromosome Res. 2024 Jul 19;32(3):9. doi: 10.1007/s10577-024-09754-y. Chromosome Res. 2024. PMID: 39026136 - Multidisciplinary Workup for Stillbirth at a Tertiary-Care Hospital in Northeast Mexico: Findings, Challenges and Perspectives.
Robles Espinoza K, López Uriarte GA, García Castañeda GB, Torres Muñoz I, Lugo Trampe JJ, Elizondo Riojas G, Barboza Quintana O, Ponce Camacho M, Guzmán López A, Martínez de Villareal L. Robles Espinoza K, et al. Matern Child Health J. 2024 Jun;28(6):1072-1079. doi: 10.1007/s10995-023-03874-3. Epub 2024 Jan 6. Matern Child Health J. 2024. PMID: 38184497 - Feasibility of Optical Genome Mapping from Placental and Umbilical Cord Sampled after Spontaneous or Therapeutic Pregnancy Termination.
Goumy C, Ouedraogo ZG, Bellemonte E, Eymard-Pierre E, Soler G, Perthus I, Pebrel-Richard C, Gouas L, Salaun G, Véronèse L, Laurichesse H, Darcha C, Tchirkov A. Goumy C, et al. Diagnostics (Basel). 2023 Nov 30;13(23):3576. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics13233576. Diagnostics (Basel). 2023. PMID: 38066817 Free PMC article. - Investigating the "Fetal Side" in Recurrent Pregnancy Loss: Reliability of Cell-Free DNA Testing in Detecting Chromosomal Abnormalities of Miscarriage Tissue.
D'Ippolito S, Longo G, Orteschi D, Busnelli A, Di Simone N, Pulcinelli E, Schettini G, Scambia G, Zollino M. D'Ippolito S, et al. J Clin Med. 2023 Jun 7;12(12):3898. doi: 10.3390/jcm12123898. J Clin Med. 2023. PMID: 37373593 Free PMC article.
References
- MacDorman MF, Kirmeyer S. Fetal and perinatal mortality, United States, 2005. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2009;57(8):1–19. - PubMed
- Smith GC, Fretts RC. Stillbirth. Lancet. 2007;370:1715–1725. - PubMed
- Pauli RM, Reiser CA, Lebovitz RM, Kirkpatrick SJ. Wisconsin Stillbirth Service Program: I. Establishment and assessment of a community-based program for etiologic investigation of intrauterine deaths. Am J Med Genet. 1994;50:116–134. - PubMed
- Korteweg FJ, Bouman K, Erwich JJ, et al. Cytogenetic analysis after evaluation of 750 fetal deaths: proposal for diagnostic workup. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111:865–874. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
- HD45944/HD/NICHD NIH HHS/United States
- HD45955/HD/NICHD NIH HHS/United States
- HD45952/HD/NICHD NIH HHS/United States
- U10 HD045953/HD/NICHD NIH HHS/United States
- U01 HD045954/HD/NICHD NIH HHS/United States
- HD45954/HD/NICHD NIH HHS/United States
- HD45925/HD/NICHD NIH HHS/United States
- HD45953/HD/NICHD NIH HHS/United States
- U10 HD045925/HD/NICHD NIH HHS/United States
- U10 HD045952/HD/NICHD NIH HHS/United States
- U10 HD045955/HD/NICHD NIH HHS/United States
- U10 HD045944/HD/NICHD NIH HHS/United States
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials