Asset Details
MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Chromosomal microarray vs. NIPS: analysis of 5541 low-risk pregnancies
by
Matar, Reut
, Basel-Salmon, Lina
, Agmon-Fishman, Ifat
, Klein, Cochava
, Tenne, Tamar
, Sagi-Dain, Lena
, Yacobson, Shiri
, Kahana, Sarit
, Maya, Idit
, Cohen Vig, Lital
in
Aneuploidy
/ Biomedical and Life Sciences
/ Biomedicine
/ Chromosome Aberrations - embryology
/ Chromosome Disorders - diagnosis
/ Cohort Studies
/ Female
/ Genetic Testing - methods
/ Health risk assessment
/ Human Genetics
/ Humans
/ Karyotyping - methods
/ Laboratory Medicine
/ Microarray Analysis - methods
/ Pregnancy
/ Prenatal Diagnosis - methods
/ Retrospective Studies
/ Ultrasonic imaging
/ Ultrasonography, Prenatal - methods
2019
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Chromosomal microarray vs. NIPS: analysis of 5541 low-risk pregnancies
by
Matar, Reut
, Basel-Salmon, Lina
, Agmon-Fishman, Ifat
, Klein, Cochava
, Tenne, Tamar
, Sagi-Dain, Lena
, Yacobson, Shiri
, Kahana, Sarit
, Maya, Idit
, Cohen Vig, Lital
in
Aneuploidy
/ Biomedical and Life Sciences
/ Biomedicine
/ Chromosome Aberrations - embryology
/ Chromosome Disorders - diagnosis
/ Cohort Studies
/ Female
/ Genetic Testing - methods
/ Health risk assessment
/ Human Genetics
/ Humans
/ Karyotyping - methods
/ Laboratory Medicine
/ Microarray Analysis - methods
/ Pregnancy
/ Prenatal Diagnosis - methods
/ Retrospective Studies
/ Ultrasonic imaging
/ Ultrasonography, Prenatal - methods
2019
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Chromosomal microarray vs. NIPS: analysis of 5541 low-risk pregnancies
by
Matar, Reut
, Basel-Salmon, Lina
, Agmon-Fishman, Ifat
, Klein, Cochava
, Tenne, Tamar
, Sagi-Dain, Lena
, Yacobson, Shiri
, Kahana, Sarit
, Maya, Idit
, Cohen Vig, Lital
in
Aneuploidy
/ Biomedical and Life Sciences
/ Biomedicine
/ Chromosome Aberrations - embryology
/ Chromosome Disorders - diagnosis
/ Cohort Studies
/ Female
/ Genetic Testing - methods
/ Health risk assessment
/ Human Genetics
/ Humans
/ Karyotyping - methods
/ Laboratory Medicine
/ Microarray Analysis - methods
/ Pregnancy
/ Prenatal Diagnosis - methods
/ Retrospective Studies
/ Ultrasonic imaging
/ Ultrasonography, Prenatal - methods
2019
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Chromosomal microarray vs. NIPS: analysis of 5541 low-risk pregnancies
Journal Article
Chromosomal microarray vs. NIPS: analysis of 5541 low-risk pregnancies
2019
Request Book From Autostore
and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
Purpose
To evaluate the diagnostic yield of chromosomal microarray (CMA) in pregnancies with normal ultrasound.
Methods
This retrospective cohort analysis included all pregnancies with normal ultrasound undergoing CMA testing between the years 2010 and 2016. We calculated the rate of detection of clinically significant CMA findings in the whole cohort and according to various indications.
Results
Of 5541 CMA analyses, clinically significant findings were yielded in 78 cases (1.4%). Of these, 31 (39.7%) variants could have theoretically been detected by karyotyping (e.g., sized above 10 Mb), and 28 (35.9%) by noninvasive prenatal screening aimed at five common aneuploidies. Of the 47 submicroscopic findings detectable by CMA only, the majority (37 cases, 78.7%) represented known recurrent syndromes. Detection of clinically significant CMA findings in women with no indication for invasive testing was 0.76% (21/2752), which was significantly lower compared with 1.8% in advanced maternal age group (41/2336), 2.8% in abnormal biochemical serum screening (6/211), and 4.1% (10/242) in fetuses with sonographic soft markers.
Conclusion
Clinically significant CMA aberrations are detected in 1 of 71 pregnancies with normal ultrasound, and in 1 of 131 women with no indication for invasive testing. Thus, CMA might be recommended a first-tier test in pregnancies with normal ultrasound.
Publisher
Nature Publishing Group US,Elsevier Limited
MBRLCatalogueRelatedBooks
Related Items
Related Items
We currently cannot retrieve any items related to this title. Kindly check back at a later time.
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website.