Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Case Reports
. 2020 Dec;34(12):e23514.
doi: 10.1002/jcla.23514. Epub 2020 Aug 30.

The difference between karyotype analysis and chromosome microarray for mosaicism of aneuploid chromosomes in prenatal diagnosis

Affiliations
Case Reports

The difference between karyotype analysis and chromosome microarray for mosaicism of aneuploid chromosomes in prenatal diagnosis

MengZhe Hao et al. J Clin Lab Anal. 2020 Dec.

Abstract

Objective: To compare karyotype and chromosomal microarray (CMA) analysis of aneuploid chromosome mosaicism in amniocentesis samples.

Materials and methods: A total of 2091 amniocentesis samples from pregnant women were collected from March 1, 2019, to January 31, 2020. Karyotype analysis was performed using G-banding and CMA analysis used the Affymetrix CytoScan 750K SNP microarray.

Result: Thirteen cases with aneuploid chromosome mosaicism were detected and compared between the karyotype and CMA methods. Seven of these cases were trisomic mosaicism, and the levels of mosaicism calculated from CMA were higher than those detected from karyotype analysis; noting three cases of trisomy mosaicism were not detected by karyotype analysis. Four cases exhibited monomeric mosaicism, and the levels of mosaicism detected in three of these cases were higher in karyotype compared with CMA analysis; one case had equivalent levels of monomeric mosaicism from both karyotype and CMA analysis. Two other cases from karyotype analysis were a mix of monosomic and trisomic mosaicism, whereas the CMA result was restricted to monosomic mosaicism for these cases.

Conclusion: Both karyotype and CMA analysis can be used to detect aneuploid chromosome mosaicism. However, the two methods produced different results. CMA and karyotype analysis have their own advantages in detecting aneuploid mosaicism, and the combination of these methods provides a more rigorous diagnosis.

Keywords: CMA; aneuploidy; karyotype analysis; mosaicism; prenatal diagnosis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Hui L, Poulton A, Kluckow E, et al. A minimum estimate of the prevalence of 22q11 deletion syndrome and other chromosome abnormalities in a combined prenatal and postnatal cohort. Hum Reprod. 2020;35(3):694‐704. - PubMed
    1. Conner P, Iwarsson E. OC02.04: residual risk for a postnatal diagnosis and livebirth of an atypical chromosomal aberration following first trimester combined screening. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019;54(S1):4.
    1. Lin C‐Z, Qi B‐R, Hu J‐S, Huang X‐Q. A fetus with Kabuki syndrome 2 detected by chromosomal microarray analysis. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2020;13(2):302‐306. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Haertle L, Muller T, Lardenoije R, et al. Methylomic profiling in trisomy 21 identifies cognition‐ and Alzheimer's disease‐related dysregulation. Clin Epigenet. 2019;11(1):195. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gentile M, Volpe P, Cariola F, et al. Prenatal diagnosis of chromosome 4 mosaicism: prognostic role of cytogenetic, molecular, and ultrasound/MRI characterization. Am J Med Genet A. 2005;136(1):66‐70. - PubMed

Publication types