Additional information from array comparative genomic hybridization technology over conventional karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: a systematic review and meta‐analysis
Open Access
- 22 December 2010
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology
- Vol. 37 (1), 6-14
- https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.7754
Abstract
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 karyo‐typing 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 © 2010 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Keywords
This publication has 21 references indexed in Scilit:
- Whole‐genome microarray analysis in prenatal specimens identifies clinically significant chromosome alterations without increase in results of unclear significance compared to targeted microarrayPrenatal Diagnosis, 2009
- Clinical use of array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) for prenatal diagnosis in 300 casesPrenatal Diagnosis, 2008
- Rapid prenatal diagnosis using uncultured amniocytes and oligonucleotide array CGHPrenatal Diagnosis, 2008
- Comparison of microarray‐based detection rates for cytogenetic abnormalities in prenatal and neonatal specimensPrenatal Diagnosis, 2008
- Cryptic deletions are a common finding in "balanced" reciprocal and complex chromosome rearrangements: a study of 59 patientsJournal of Medical Genetics, 2007
- Copy number variations and clinical cytogenetic diagnosis of constitutional disordersNature Genetics, 2007
- Prenatal detection of unbalanced chromosomal rearrangements by array CGHJournal of Medical Genetics, 2005
- Frequency and ratePublished by Cambridge University Press (CUP) ,2001
- High resolution comparative genomic hybridisation in clinical cytogeneticsJournal of Medical Genetics, 2001
- Some Statistical Methods for Combining Experimental ResultsInternational Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 1990