期刊文献+

G显带和aCGH技术联合检测92例早期自然流产妊娠物核型分析 被引量:10

Detection of the Karyotype in 92 First Trimester Spontaneous Abortions by G-banding in Combination with aCGH Tethnology
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的:探讨影响早期自然流产妊娠物染色体异常的因素以及微阵列比较基因组杂交技术(aCGH)在流产妊娠物核型检测中的应用价值。方法:收集在我院妇产科门诊确诊为"胚胎停育"的病例共92例,对清宫后获得的妊娠物进行绒毛染色体G显带核型分析,绒毛体外培养或G显带分析失败的进行aCGH检测。结果:本实验对92例自然流产妊娠物的绒毛组织进行体外培养,85例(92.4%)G显带染色体核型分析成功,失败的7例进行aCGH检测,两种方法联合分析的成功率100%。其中异常核型50例(异常率54.3%),非整倍体40例(非整倍体率43.5%)。复发性流产和偶发性流产患者的异常率分别是50.0%和58.3%,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。年龄≥35岁患者妊娠物核型为非整倍体的概率(61.5%)大于年龄<35岁的患者(36.4%),差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。流产儿男女性别比约为1∶1.2,男性胚胎核型异常率(42.9%)小于女性(64.0%),差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。超声检查示妊娠囊内无胎芽和有胎芽患者的核型异常率分别为53.3%和54.8%(P>0.05);曾见胎心和从未见胎心患者的异常率分别为58.7%和50.0%,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:自然流产妊娠物核型异常的风险与流产次数以及有无胎芽或胎心无关,非整倍体妊娠的风险随母体年龄增大,女性胚胎在早孕期更易发生染色体异常。aCGH技术在检测流产妊娠物核型中有优越性。 Objective:To investigate the influencing factors of chromosomal abnormalities in the first trimester spontaneous abortions and the application of array-based comparative genomic hybridization(aCGH) in analyzing the karyotype of products of conception. Methods :92 spontaneous abortion specimens(chorion- ic villus samples) were selected from the gynecological outpatient service of Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shangdong University, which was identified as "embryonic demises". Chorionic villus samples were cultured in vitro and analyzed by standard G-banding techniques;failed cultured or G-banding samples were detected by aCGH. Results:Karyotyping by standard G-banding techniques was attempted on 92 spontaneous abortion specimens, in which 85 specimens were analyzed successfully(92.4% ), and 7 specimens that failed to yield a karyotype were detected by aCGH. The success rate of conjoint analysis by the two methods was 100%. Chromosome abnormalities were found in 50 specimens(54. 3% ) and of which 40 were aneuploidy (43. 5% ). The rate of chromosomal abnormality in recurrent spontaneous abortions group and sporadic abortions group was 50. 0% and 58.3% respectively ( P 〉 0.05 ), there was no significant statistically differ- ence. The frequency of aneuploidy in women aged I〉35 years old(61.5% ) was higher than that in women aged 〈 35 years old (36.4%), there was significant statistically difference( P 〈 0. 05). The gender ratio (male to female)of abortus was 1 : 1.2, The frequency of abnormal embryonic karyotypes in male abortions was less than that in female abortions, at 42.9% and 64. 0% respectively, there was significant statistically difference( P 〈 0.05). The abnormality rate in anembryonic gestations was 53. 3%,which was not statistically different from the 54. 8% rate seen in pregnancies with embryonic poles. When comparing miscarriages with and without a history of documented cardiac activity,there was no statistically significant difference in the rate of abnormal karyotypes,at 58.7% and 50. 0% respectively ( P 〈 0.05). Conclusions: Chromosomal abnormalities in the first trimester spontaneous abortions are not related to the number of spontaneous abortions, embryonic pole presence or absence or fetal heart activity, but the risk increased with maternal age. Female fetus have higher risk of chromosomal abnormalities in early stages of pregnancy. ACGH has a remarkable advantage in detecting the karyotype of abortion products.
出处 《实用妇产科杂志》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2013年第5期366-370,共5页 Journal of Practical Obstetrics and Gynecology
基金 国家自然科学基金(编号:81170590)
关键词 早期自然流产 G显带 微阵列比较基因组杂交技术 染色体异常 First trimester spontaneous abortion G-banding Array-based comparative genomic hybridization Chromosomal abnormalities
  • 相关文献

参考文献12

  • 1Carp H, Toder V, Aviram A, et al. Karyotype of the abortus in recurrent miscarriage [ J ]. Fertil Steril,2001,75 (4) :678 - 682.
  • 2Sugiura-Ogasawara M, Ozaki Y, Katano K, et al. Abnormal embryonic karyotype is the most frequent cause of recurrent miscarriage [ J ]. Hum Reprod,2012,27 ( 8 ) :2297 - 2303.
  • 3Stephenson MD, Awartani KA, Robinson WP. Cytogenetic analysis of miscarriages from couples with recurrent miscarriage: a case-control study [ J ]. Hum Reprod ,2002,17 (2) :446 - 451.
  • 4Gutierrez-Mateo C, Benet J, Wells D, et al. Aneuploidy study of human oocytes first polar body comparative genomic hybridization and metaphase Ⅱ fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis[J]. Hum Reprod,2004,19 (12) :2859 - 2868.
  • 5Grande M, Borrell A, Garcia-Posada R, et al. The effect of maternal age on chromosomal anomaly rate and spectrum in recurrent miscarriage[J]. Hum Reprod ,2012,27 (10) :3109 - 3117.
  • 6Ljunger E, Stavreus-Evers A, Cnattingius S, et al. Ultrasonographic findings in spontaneous miscarriage: relation to euploidy and aneuploidy [ J ]. Fertil Steril,2011,95 ( 1 ) :221 - 224.
  • 7Pacehierotti F, Adler ID, Eichenlaub-Ritter U, et al. Gender effects on the incidence of aneuploidy in mammalian germ ceils [J]. Environ Res,2007,104 ( 1 ) :46 - 69.
  • 8熊丽,刘洁,邓康,刘思平,贾蓓,吴瑞枫,钟梅,曾嵘.早期自然流产绒毛细胞培养及染色体核型分析110例[J].南方医科大学学报,2009,29(1):64-67. 被引量:62
  • 9Munoz M, Arigita M, Bennasar M, et al. Chromosomal anomaly spectrum in early pregnancy loss in relation to presence or absence of an embryonic pole[ J]. Fertil Steril,2010,94(7):2564- 2568.
  • 10Lathi RB, Mark SD, Westphal LM, et al. Cytogenetic testing of anembryonic pregnancies compared to embryonic missed abortions [ J ]. J Assist Reprod Genet,2007,24( 11 ) :521 - 524.

二级参考文献43

  • 1钱卫平,谭玉梅,宋丹,谭跃球,卢光琇.1780例自然流产患者的细胞遗传学分析[J].中南大学学报(医学版),2005,30(3):258-260. 被引量:16
  • 2Macklon NS, Geraedts JP, Fauser BC. Conception to ongoing pregnancy the 'black box' of early pregnancy loss [J]. Hum Reprod, 2002, 8(4): 333-43.
  • 3Bagislar S, Ustuner I, Cengiz B, et al. Extremely skewed X-chromosome inactivation patterns in women with recurrent spontaneous abortion [ J ]. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol, 2006, 46(5): 384-7.
  • 4Warburton D. Cytogenetics of reproductive wastage: from conception to birth[J]. Med Cytogene, 2000: 213-46.
  • 5Sullivan AE, Silver RM, LaCoursiere DY, et al. Recurrent fetal aneuploidy and recurrent miscarriage [J]. Obstetri Gyneeol, 2004, 104(4): 784-8.
  • 6Carrera M, Ribas I, Torrents M, et al. Spontaneous repeteat abortions and numerical chromosome anomalies: genetic diagnosis before preimplantation alternative diagnosis[J]? Prog Diagn Prenat, 1996, 8: 342-7.
  • 7Diego-Alvarezl D, Garcia-Hoyos M, Trujillo MJ, et al. Application of quantitative fluorescent PCR with short tandem repeat markers to the study of aneuploidies in spontaneous miscarriages [J]. Hum Reprod, 2005, 20(5): 1235-43.
  • 8Carrera M. Screening prenatal de aneuploidias: QF-PCR vs FISH[ J ].Prog Diag Prenat, 2001, 13: 262-6.
  • 9Stephenson MD, Awartani KA, Robinson WP. Cytogenetic analysis of miscarriages from couples with recurrent miscarriage: a case-control study[ J ]. Hum Reprod, 2002, 17:446-51.
  • 10Lebedev I. Molecular cytogenetics of recurrent missed abortions [ J ].J Med Res, 2006,124(1): 9-10.

共引文献65

同被引文献115

  • 1张颖新,刘雨生,何国平,周桂香,宋雅娴.51例稽留流产胎儿绒毛染色体分析[J].临床输血与检验,2011,13(2):157-159. 被引量:14
  • 2黄莉,谢丹尼,吕福通,柳青,陈一君,孙燕萍,牛向丽.孕早期绒毛膜细胞原位培养和染色体制备方法的初步研究[J].中国计划生育学杂志,2006,14(1):43-45. 被引量:5
  • 3徐以民,何俊琳,刘学庆,刘孝云,陈雪梅,王应雄.小鼠胚泡着床期子宫内膜LongSAGE基因文库构建[J].细胞生物学杂志,2006,28(3):463-467. 被引量:2
  • 4Wilson RD, Chitayat D, McGillivray BC. Fetal ultrasound abnormalities: correlation with fetal karyotype, autopsy findings and postnatal outcome-five year prospective study[J]. Am J Med Genet, 1992, 44: 586-590.
  • 5Rizzo N, Pittalis MC, Pilu G, et al. Distribution of abnormal karyotypes among malformed fetuses detected by ultrasound throughout gestation[J]. Prenat Diagn, 1996, 16: 159-163.
  • 6Ire Caignec C, Boceno M, Saugier-Veber P, et aI. Detection of genomic imbalances by array based comparative genomie hybridisation in fetuses with multiple malformations[J]. J Med Genet, 2005, 42: 121-128.
  • 7Hillman SC, Pretlove S, Coomarasamy A, et al. Additional information from array comparative genomic hybridization technology over conventional karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2011, 37: 6-14.
  • 8Sahoo T, Cheung S, Ward P, et al. Prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal abnormalities using array-based comparative genomic hybridization[J]. Genet Med, 2006, 8: 719-727.
  • 9Maya I, Davidov B, Gershovitz L, et al. Diagnostic utility of array-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) in a prenatal setting[J]. Prenat Diagn, 2010, 30: 1131-1137.
  • 10D'Amours G, Kibar array CGH identifies Z, Mathonnet G, pathogenic copy et al. Whole-genome number variations in fetuses with major malformations and a normal karyotype[J]. Clin Genet, 2012, 81: 128-141.

引证文献10

二级引证文献68

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部