Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26143093›Full record

ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2015

Changes in and Efficacies of Indications for Invasive Prenatal Diagnosis of Cytogenomic Abnormalities: 13 Years of Experience in a Single Center.

Jinlai Meng, Chelsea Matarese, Julianna Crivello, Katherine Wilcox, Dongmei Wang, Autumn DiAdamo, Fang Xu, Peining Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Jinlai MengDepartment of Genetics, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Chelsea MatareseDepartment of Genetics, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Julianna CrivelloDepartment of Genetics, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Katherine WilcoxDepartment of Genetics, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Dongmei WangDepartment of Genetics, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Autumn DiAdamoDepartment of Genetics, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Fang XuDepartment of Genetics, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Peining LiDepartment of Genetics, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBecause the future application of cell-free fetal DNA screening is expected to dramatically improve the diagnostic yield and reduce unnecessary invasive procedures, it is time to summarize the indications of invasive prenatal diagnosis. This retrospective study was performed to evaluate the changes and efficacies of indications of invasive procedures for detecting cytogenomic abnormalities from 2000 to 2012. MATERIAL AND

methodsFrom our regional obstetric unit, 7818 invasive procedures were referred by indications of advance maternal age (AMA), abnormal ultrasound findings (aUS), abnormal maternal serum screening (aMSS), and family history (FH). Chromosome, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), and array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) analyses were performed on chorionic villus sampling (CVS) and amniotic fluid (AF) specimens at the Yale Cytogenetics Laboratory. The abnormal findings from single or combined indications were compared to evaluate the diagnostic yield.

resultsThe annual caseload declined by 57.2% but the diagnostic yield increased from 7.2% to 13.4%. Chromosomal and genomic abnormalities were detected in 752 cases (9.6%, 752/7818) and 12 cases (4%, 12/303), respectively. Significantly decreased AMA referrals and increased aUS and aMSS referrals were noted. The top 3 indications by diagnostic yield were AMA/aUS (51.4% for CVS, 24.2% for AF), aUS (34.7% for CVS, 14.5% for AF), and AMA/aMSS (17.8% for CVS, 9.9% for AF).

conclusionsOver a period of 13 years, the indication of aMSS and aUS were increasing while AMA was decreasing for prenatal diagnosis of cytogenomic abnormalities, and there was a continuous trend of reduced invasive procedures. Prenatal evaluation using AMA/aUS was the most effective in detecting chromosomal abnormalities, but better indications for genomic abnormalities are needed.

Indexed as

Chromosome AberrationsPrenatal DiagnosisComparative Genomic HybridizationFemaleHumansIn Situ Hybridization, FluorescencePregnancy

Identifiers

PMID26143093
PMCPMC4497468

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.