Pitfalls in prenatal diagnosis: Cytogenetic analysis in amniocytes fails to detect mosaic r(12)

Prenatal Diagnosis

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 65-67

  De Pater, J M ^a   Scheres, J M J C ^a,b   Christiaens, G C M L ^a   Ausems, M G E M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^b Clinical Genetics Center   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Chromosome mosaicism; False negative results; Prenatal diagnosis

Indexed keywords

AMNION CELL; AMNIOTIC FLUID CELL; ARTICLE; CELL CULTURE; CHROMOSOME ANALYSIS; CHROMOSOME MOSAICISM; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; HUMAN; LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS; LYMPHOCYTE; METAPHASE; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SUPERNUMERARY CHROMOSOME;

ADULT; AMNIOCENTESIS; AMNIOTIC FLUID; CELLS, CULTURED; FALSE NEGATIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION, FLUORESCENCE; INFANT; KARYOTYPING; LYMPHOCYTES; MATERNAL AGE; MOSAICISM; NETHERLANDS; PRACTICE GUIDELINES; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY, HIGH-RISK; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RING CHROMOSOMES;

EID: 0037241327     PISSN: 01973851     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pd.514     Document Type: Article

References (8)

1. Baens M, Peeters P, Guo C, Aerssen J, Marynen P. 1996. Genomic organization of TEL: the human ETS-variant gene 6. Genome Res 6: 404-413.
2. Cheung SW, Spitznagel E, Featherstone T, Crane JP. 1990. Exclusion of chromosomal mosaicism in amniotic fluid cultures: efficacy of in situ versus flask techniques. Prenat Diagn 10: 41-57.
3. Featherstone T, Cheung SW, Spitznagel E, Peakman D. 1994. Exclusion of chromosomal mosaicism in amniotic fluid cultures: determination of number of colonies needed for accurate analysis. Prenat Diagn 14: 1009-1017.
4. Hsu LYF, Yu M-T, Richkind KE, et al. 1996. Incidence and significance of chromosome mosaicism involving an autosomal structural abnormality diagnosed prenatally through amniocentesis: a collaborative study. Prenat Diagn 16: 1-28.
5. Looijenga LH, Oosterhuis JW, Smit VT, Wessels JW, Mollevanger P, Devilee P. 1992. Alpha satellite DNAs on chromosomes 10 and 12 are both members of the dimeric suprachromosomal subfamily, but display little identity at the nucleotide sequence level. Genomics 13: 1125-1132.
6. Lowther GW, Boskos V. 2000. An audit of the efficacy of reducing the numbers of cells counted in karyotyping amniotic fluid samples. 10th International Conference on Prenatal Diagnosis and Therapy, ISPD, 19-21 June 2000, Barcelona, P-35, 341.
7. Takahashi E, Koyama K, Hitomi A, Nakamura Y. 1993. A highresolution cytogenetic map of human chromosome 12: localization of 195 new cosmid markers by direct R-banding fluorescence in situ hybridization. Hum Genet 92: 405-409.
8. Warburton D. 1991. De novo balanced chromosome rearrangements and extra marker chromosomes identified at prenatal diagnosis: clinical significance and distribution of breakpoints. Am J Hum Genet 49: 995-1013.