ArticleInternational journal of women's health2026
The Application Value of Chromosome Microarray Analysis in Prenatal Diagnosis of Clinically Relevant Copy Number Variations in Fetuses.
Article in International journal of women's health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Exploring the clinical application value of chromosome microarray analysis (CMA) technology in detecting clinically relevant copy number variations (CNVs) in fetuses and evaluating its efficacy in prenatal diagnosis. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 2860 pregnant women undergoing prenatal diagnosis between January 2019 and August 2023. All cases received concurrent G-banded karyotyping and CMA. Detection rates were compared and stratified by clinical indications (eg, structural anomalies, increased nuchal translucency NT). CNVs were classified per ACMG guidelines. Parental origin verification and neonatal follow-up (6 months to 2 years) were performed to correlate CNVs with postnatal phenotypes. Results: CMA yielded a significantly higher overall detection rate than karyotyping (14.41% vs 10.10%, P<0.05), identifying 238 pathogenic (8.32%), 62 likely pathogenic (2.17%), and 112 VUS (3.92%) cases. The highest CMA yield occurred in fetuses with structural anomalies (26.85%), particularly multi-system defects (25.16% P/LP yield). Pathogenic yields also rose progressively with NT thickness. Of the 300 P/LP CNVs, 54.00% were microdeletions and 61.33% were <5 Mb, with DiGeorge syndrome being most prevalent (5.67%). De novo P/LP CNVs showed a significantly higher rate of abnormal postnatal phenotypes (40.00%) compared to inherited cases (10.53%, P<0.05). For VUS, inherited cases had a significantly higher postnatal normality rate (93.75%) than de novo variants (66.67%, P<0.05). Conclusion: Based on large sample data, this study confirms that CMA technology can not only improve the overall detection rate of fetal chromosomal abnormalities, but also effectively identify submicroscopic CNVs within the blind spots of traditional karyotype analysis. It serves as a high-value first-line tool for fetuses with multisystem anomalies or increased NT. Parental origin verification is critical for refining VUS interpretation and guiding pregnancy management.
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.