Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Chromosomal Microarray Analysis in Fetuses With Ultrasonographic Soft Markers: A Meta-Analysis of the Current Evidence.
Kim, Uisuk; Jung, Young Mi; Oh, Sohee; Bae, Ji Hye; Lee, Jeesun; Park, Chan-Wook; Park, Joong Shin; Jun, Jong Kwan; Lee, Seung Mi.
Affiliation
  • Kim U; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
  • Jung YM; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
  • Oh S; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Korea University Guro Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
  • Bae JH; Department of Biostatistics, Seoul Metropolitan Government-Seoul National University Hospital Boramae Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
  • Lee J; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
  • Park CW; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
  • Park JS; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
  • Jun JK; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
  • Lee SM; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
J Korean Med Sci ; 39(8): e70, 2024 Mar 04.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38442716
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Ultrasonographic soft markers are normal variants, rather than fetal abnormalities, and guidelines recommend a detailed survey of fetal anatomy to determine the necessity of antenatal karyotyping. Anecdotal reports have described cases with ultrasonographic soft markers in which chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) revealed pathogenic copy number variants (CNVs) despite normal results on conventional karyotyping, but CMA for ultrasonographic soft markers remains a matter of debate. In this systematic review, we evaluated the clinical significance of CMA for pregnancies with isolated ultrasonographic soft markers and a normal fetal karyotype.

METHODS:

An electronic search was conducted by an experienced librarian through the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases. We reviewed 3,338 articles (3,325 identified by database searching and 13 by a hand search) about isolated ultrasonographic soft markers, and seven ultrasonographic markers (choroid plexus cysts, echogenic bowel, echogenic intracardiac focus, hypoplastic nasal bone, short femur [SF], single umbilical artery, and urinary tract dilatation) were included for this study.

RESULTS:

Seven eligible articles were included in the final review. Pathogenic or likely pathogenic CNVs were found in fetuses with isolated ultrasonographic soft markers and a normal karyotype. The overall prevalence of pathogenic or likely pathogenic CNVs was 2.0% (41 of 2,048). The diagnostic yield of CMA was highest in fetuses with isolated SF (9 of 225, 3.9%).

CONCLUSION:

CMA could aid in risk assessment and pregnancy counseling in pregnancies where the fetus has isolated ultrasonographic soft markers along with a normal karyotype.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Ultrasonography, Prenatal / Microarray Analysis / Fetus Limits: Female / Humans / Pregnancy Language: En Journal: J Korean Med Sci Journal subject: MEDICINA Year: 2024 Type: Article

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Ultrasonography, Prenatal / Microarray Analysis / Fetus Limits: Female / Humans / Pregnancy Language: En Journal: J Korean Med Sci Journal subject: MEDICINA Year: 2024 Type: Article