ArticleGenes2022
Comparative Genomic Hybridization to Microarrays in Fetuses with High-Risk Prenatal Indications: Polish Experience with 7400 Pregnancies.
Article in Genes, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of chromosomal microarray analysis and trio whole-exome sequencing in first-trimester prenatal diagnosis for high-risk pregnancies.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- DiGeorge Syndrome in newborns conceived from assisted reproductive techniques: is preimplantation screening necessary? A discussion of two cases.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Article
- Prenatal multidisciplinary counseling for fetal congenital anomalies: A narrative review.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025Review
- Clinical application of single nucleotide polymorphism array in prenatal diagnosis: Experience with 8753 samples.PloS one · 2025Article
- Chromosomal abnormalities detected by chromosomal microarray analysis and pregnancy outcomes of 4211 fetuses with high-risk prenatal indications.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Inferring chromosomal instability from copy number aberrations as a measure of chromosomal instability across human cancers.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2023Article
- Inferring chromosomal instability from copy number aberrations as a measure of chromosomal instability across human cancers.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
44 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to determine the suitability of the comparative genomic hybridization to microarray (aCGH) technique for prenatal diagnosis, but also to assess the frequency of chromosomal aberrations that may lead to fetal malformations but are not included in the diagnostic report. We present the results of the aCGH in a cohort of 7400 prenatal cases, indicated for invasive testing due to ultrasound abnormalities, high-risk for serum screening, thickened nuchal translucency, family history of genetic abnormalities or congenital abnormalities, and advanced maternal age (AMA). The overall chromosomal aberration detection rate was 27.2% (2010/7400), including 71.2% (1431/2010) of numerical aberrations and 28.8% (579/2010) of structural aberrations. Additionally, the detection rate of clinically significant copy number variants (CNVs) was 6.8% (505/7400) and 0.7% (57/7400) for variants of unknown clinical significance. The detection rate of clinically significant submicroscopic CNVs was 7.9% (334/4204) for fetuses with structural anomalies, 5.4% (18/336) in AMA, 3.1% (22/713) in the group of abnormal serum screening and 6.1% (131/2147) in other indications. Using the aCGH method, it was possible to assess the frequency of pathogenic chromosomal aberrations, of likely pathogenic and of uncertain clinical significance, in the groups of cases with different indications for an invasive test.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.