Optimized criteria for using fluorescence in situ hybridization in the prenatal diagnosis of common aneuploidies

Prenatal Diagnosis

Volumn 28, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 313-318

  Leclercq, Sandrine ^a   Lebbar, Aziza ^a   Grange, Gilles ^a   Tsatsaris, Vassilis ^a   Le Tessier, Dominique ^a   Dupont, Jean Michel ^a  

^a Unité De Cytogénétique ^*  (France)

Author keywords

Aneuploidy; Interphase FISH; Prenatal diagnosis

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AMNIOCENTESIS; AMNION FLUID ANALYSIS; ANEUPLOIDY; ARTICLE; CHROMOSOME ABERRATION; CHROMOSOME REARRANGEMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FLUORESCENCE IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION; HUMAN; KARYOTYPING; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MATERNAL AGE; MATERNAL SERUM; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL STAFF; PATIENT REFERRAL; PATIENT SELECTION; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TRISOMY 21; ULTRASOUND;

ADULT; AMNIOCENTESIS; ANEUPLOIDY; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; FEMALE; GENETIC SCREENING; HUMANS; IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION, FLUORESCENCE; KARYOTYPING; MATERNAL AGE; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY COMPLICATIONS; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 42049112787     PISSN: 01973851     EISSN: 10970223     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pd.1959     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Bink K, Pauer HU, Bartels I. 2000. Interphase FISH test as a rapid test for trisomies in amniotic fluid-results of a prospective study. Z Geburtshilfe Neonatal 204: 8-13.
2. Caine A, Maltby AE, Parkin CA, Waters JJ, Crolla JA, UK Association of Clinical Cytogeneticists (ACC). 2005. Prenatal detection of Down's syndrome by rapid aneuploidy testing for chromosomes 13, 18, and 21 by FISH or PCR without a full karyotype: a cytogenetic risk assessment. Lancet 366: 123-128.
3. Dupont JM, Carles E. 2004. Three-year national survey of prenatal cytogenetic activity in France 1998-2000, ECA Newsletter No 13, January 2004.
4. Eiben B, Trawicki W, Hammans W, Goebel R, Pruggmayer M, Epplen JT. 1999. Rapid prenatal diagnosis of aneuploidies in uncultured amniocytes by fluorescence in situ hybridization. Evaluation of >3, 000 cases. Fetal Diagn Ther 14: 193-197.
5. Evans MI, Sharp M, Tepperberg J, Kilpatrick MW, Tsipouras P, Tafas T. 2006. Automated microscopy of amniotic fluid cells: detection of FISH signals using the FastFISH imaging system. Fetal Diagn Ther 21: 523-527.
6. Evans MI, Henry GP, Miller WA, et al. 1999. International, collaborative assessment of 146,000 prenatal karyotypes: expected limitations if only chromosome-specific probes and fluorescent in-situ hybridization are used. Hum Reprod 14: 1213-1216.
7. Homer J, Bhatt S, Huang B, Thangavelu M. 2003. Residual risk for cytogenetic abnormalities after prenatal diagnosis by interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Prenat Diagn 23: 566-571.
8. Klinger K, Landes G, Shook D, et al. 1992. Rapid detection of chromosome aneuploidies in uncultured amniocytes by using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Am J Hum Genet 51: 55-65.
9. Lev D, Daniely M, Zudik A, et al. 2005. Automatic scanning of interphase FISH for prenatal diagnosis in uncultured amniocytes. Genet Test 9: 41-47.
10. Lewin P, Kleinfinger P, Bazin A, Mossafa H, Szpiro-Tapia S. 2000. Defining the efficiency of fluorescence in situ hybridization on uncultured amniocytes on a retrospective cohort of 27407 prenatal diagnoses. Prenat Diagn 20: 1-6.
11. Luquet I, Mugneret F, Athis PD, et al. 2002. French multi-centric study of 2000 amniotic fluid interphase FISH analyses from high-risk pregnancies and review of the literature. Ann Genet 45: 77-88.
12. Müller F, Thibaud D, Poloce F, et al. 2002. Risk of amniocentesis in women screened positive for Down syndrome with second trimester maternal serum markers. Prenat Diagn 22: 1036-1039.
13. Pergament E, Chen PX, Thangavelu M, Fiddler M. 2000. The clinical application of interphase FISH in prenatal diagnosis. Prenat Diagn 20: 215-220.
14. SawaR, Hayashi Z, Tanaka T, et al. 2001. Rapid detection of chromosome aneuploidies by prenatal interphase FISH (fluorescence in situ hybridization) and its clinical utility in Japan. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 27: 41-47.
15. Shaffer LG, Bui TH. 2007. Molecular cytogenetic and rapid aneuploidy detection methods in prenatal diagnosis. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet 145: 87-98.
16. Skinner JL, Govberg IJ, DePalma RT, Cotter PD. 2001. Heteromorphisms of chromosome 18 can obscure detection of fetal aneuploidy by interphase FISH. Prenat Diagn 21: 702-704.
17. Tepperberg J, Pettenati MJ, Rao PN, et al. 2001. Prenatal diagnosis using interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH): 2-year multi-center retrospective study and review of the literature. Prenat Diagn 21: 293-301.
18. Thein AT, Abdel-Fattah SA, Kyle PM, Soothill PW. 2000. An assessment of the use of interphase FISH with chromosome specific probes as an alternative to cytogenetics in prenatal diagnosis. Prenat Diagn 20: 275-280.
19. Thilaganathan B, Sairam S, Ballard T, Peterson C, Meredith R. 2000. Effectiveness of prenatal chromosomal analysis using multicolor fluorescent in situ hybridisation. BJOG 107: 262-266.
20. Wauters J, Assche EV, Antsaklis A, Tepperberg J, Sharp SM, Kilpatrick MW, Tafas T, Tsipouras P. 2007. Fully automated FISH examination of amniotic fluid cells. Prenat Diagn 27: 951-955.
21. Witters I, Devriendt K, Legius E, et al. 2002. Rapid prenatal diagnosis of trisomy 21 in 5049 consecutive uncultured amniotic fluid samples by fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH). Prenat Diagn 22: 29-33.
22. Wyandt HE, Tonk VS, Huang XL, Evans AT, Milunsky JM, Milunsky A. 2006. Correlation of abnormal rapid FISH and chromosome results from amniocytes for prenatal diagnosis. Fetal Diagn Ther 21: 235-240.