ArticleBMC medical genomics2025
Comprehensive chromosomal abnormality detection: integrating CNV-Seq with traditional karyotyping in prenatal diagnostics.
Article in BMC medical genomics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Complementary Diagnostic Roles of Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing, Chromosomal Microarray Analysis, and Karyotyping in 14,011 High-Risk Pregnancies: A Retrospective Cohort Study with Combined Analyses.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Fetal Compound Heterozygous Microdeletion at 7q31.1 Involving IMMP2L: Case Report and Literature Review.Molecular genetics & genomic medicine · 2026Review
- Clinical characteristics and genetic analysis of different Dandy-Walker malformation.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Optimizing the diagnostic approach for sex chromosome and autosomal mosaicism in amniotic fluid: integrating karyotyping with CNV-seq.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Article
- Advancing Prenatal Diagnosis: From Conventional Karyotyping to Genome-Wide CNV Analysis.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Decoding structural birth defects through genomic landscapes: Innovative frameworks for diagnosis (Review).International journal of molecular medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of copy number variation sequencing (CNV-Seq) in detecting chromosomal abnormalities in prenatal diagnosis, comparing its performance with traditional karyotype analysis.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 1001 prenatal samples collected between April 2021 and December 2023. Samples were analyzed using both CNV-Seq and karyotype analysis. The detection rates of chromosomal abnormalities were compared between the two methods across various prenatal diagnostic indications. Clinical follow-up was performed to assess pregnancy outcomes.
resultsCNV-Seq detected chromosomal abnormalities in 89 of 1,001 cases (8.9%), compared to 50 cases (5.0%) identified by traditional karyotyping. CNV-Seq not only detected all abnormalities identified by karyotyping, including common aneuploidies such as trisomy 21 and sex chromosome abnormalities, but also uncovered 53 additional pathogenic submicroscopic CNVs associated with 33 known syndromes. The detection rates of CNV-Seq were significantly higher in high-risk groups, such as those identified by non-invasive prenatal testing (HR-NIPT) and maternal serum screening (HR-MSS), demonstrating superior sensitivity and accuracy in prenatal diagnostics.
conclusionCNV-Seq demonstrated superior sensitivity in detecting chromosomal abnormalities, particularly submicroscopic alterations, compared to traditional karyotyping. The study highlights the potential of CNV-Seq as a valuable tool in prenatal diagnostics, offering improved detection of genetic abnormalities and guiding clinical decision-making. However, a combined approach using both CNV-Seq and karyotype analysis is recommended for comprehensive prenatal genetic screening.
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.