ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Prenatal Diagnosis Using Chromosomal Microarray Analysis in High-Risk Pregnancies.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chromosomal abnormalities in fetuses with congenital heart disease: a meta-analysis.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2023Pooled it
- Current Applications and Future Prospects of High-ThroughputAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Review
- Technological Advances in Molecular Diagnostic Methods for Hereditary Diseases in Preconception and Prenatal Settings.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026Review
- Hi-C technology for detection of chromosomal rearrangements in families with adverse pregnancy outcomes: a preliminary exploratory study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Molecular genetic and pregnancy outcomes of fetuses with increased Nuchal Translucency.PloS one · 2026Article
- Genomic risk profiling in advanced maternal age: a Tamil Nadu prenatal study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Hidden in Plain Sight: A Rare 7q Deletion Masquerading as a Common Aneuploidy on Prenatal Ultrasound.Cureus · 2025Article
- Transcervical, Transabdominal and Transvaginal Chorionic Villus Sampling for Prenatal Diagnosis in Zagreb, Croatia: A Prospective Single-Operator Study on 5500 Cases.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Diagnostic performance of chromosomal microarray and whole exome sequencing in fetal structural anomalies: a single-center retrospective study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- The Diagnostic Utility of Prenatal Microarray in High-Risk Pregnancies: A Single-Center Experience in Enhancing Reproductive Care and Risk Stratification.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Advanced maternal age: copy number variations and pregnancy outcomes.Frontiers in genetics · 2023Article
- Clinical Potential of Copy Number Aberration as a Diagnostic and Prognostic Biomarker in Lymphoma.Technology in cancer research & treatmentReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To assess the value of chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) during the prenatal diagnosis of high-risk pregnancies. Methods: Between January 2016 and November 2021, we included 178 chorionic villi and 859 amniocentesis samples from consecutive cases at a multiple tertiary hospital. Each of these high-risk singleton pregnancies had at least one of the following indications: (1) advanced maternal age (AMA; ≥35 years; 546, 52.7%); (2) fetal structural abnormality on ultrasound (197, 19.0%); (3) high-risk first- or second-trimester Down syndrome screen (189, 18.2%), including increased nuchal translucency (≥3.5 mm; 90, 8.7%); or (4) previous pregnancy, child, or family history (105, 10.1%) affected by chromosomal abnormality or genetic disorder. Both G-banding karyotype analysis and CMA were performed. DNA was extracted directly and examined with oligonucleotide array-based comparative genomic hybridization. Results: Aneuploidies were detected by both G-banding karyotyping and CMA in 42/1037 (4.05%) cases. Among the 979 cases with normal karyotypes, 110 (10.6%) cases had copy number variants (CNVs) in CMA, including 30 (2.9%) cases with reported pathogenic and likely pathogenic CNVs ≥ 400 kb, 37 (3.6%) with nonreported VOUS, benign, or likely benign CNVs ≥ 400 kb, and 43 (4.1%) with nonreported CNVs < 400 kb. Of the 58 (5.6%) cases with aneuploidy rearrangements, 42 (4.1%) were diagnosed by both G-banding karyotyping and CMA; four inversions, six balanced translocations, and six low mosaic rates were not detected with CMA. Conclusions: CMA is an effective first step for the prenatal diagnosis of high-risk pregnancies with fetal structural anomalies found in ultrasonography or upon positive findings.
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.