Prenatal diagnosis of chromosome 4 mosaicism: Prognostic role of cytogenetic, molecular, and ultrasound/MRI characterization

Genetics of non-isolated hemivertebra: A systematic review of fetal, neonatal, and infant cases

Hemivertebra is a congenital vertebral malformation caused by unilateral failure of formation during embryogenesis that may be associated with additional abnormalities. A systematic review was conducted to investigate genetic etiologies of non-isolated hemivertebra identified in the fetal, neonatal, and infant periods using PubMed, Cochrane database, Ovid Medline, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception through May 2022 (PROSPERO ID CRD42021229576). The Human Phenotype Ontology database was accessed May 2022. Studies were deemed eligible for inclusion if they addressed non-isolated hemivertebra or genetic causes of non-isolated hemivertebra identified in the fetal, neonatal, or infant periods. Cases diagnosed clinically without molecular confirmation were included. Systematic review identified 23 cases of non-isolated hemivertebra with karyotypic abnormalities, 2 cases due to microdeletions, 59 cases attributed to single gene disorders, 18 syndromic cases without known genetic etiology, and 14 cases without a known syndromic association. The Human Phenotype Ontology search identified 49 genes associated with hemivertebra. Non-isolated hemivertebra is associated with a diverse spectrum of cytogenetic abnormalities and single gene disorders. Genetic syndromes were notably common. Frequently affected organ systems include musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, central nervous system, genitourinary, gastrointestinal, and facial dysmorphisms. When non-isolated hemivertebra is identified on prenatal ultrasound, the fetus must be assessed for associated anomalies and genetic counseling is recommended.

The difference between karyotype analysis and chromosome microarray for mosaicism of aneuploid chromosomes in prenatal diagnosis

OBJECTIVE

To compare karyotype and chromosomal microarray (CMA) analysis of aneuploid chromosome mosaicism in amniocentesis samples.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 2091 amniocentesis samples from pregnant women were collected from March 1, 2019, to January 31, 2020. Karyotype analysis was performed using G-banding and CMA analysis used the Affymetrix CytoScan 750K SNP microarray.

RESULT

Thirteen cases with aneuploid chromosome mosaicism were detected and compared between the karyotype and CMA methods. Seven of these cases were trisomic mosaicism, and the levels of mosaicism calculated from CMA were higher than those detected from karyotype analysis; noting three cases of trisomy mosaicism were not detected by karyotype analysis. Four cases exhibited monomeric mosaicism, and the levels of mosaicism detected in three of these cases were higher in karyotype compared with CMA analysis; one case had equivalent levels of monomeric mosaicism from both karyotype and CMA analysis. Two other cases from karyotype analysis were a mix of monosomic and trisomic mosaicism, whereas the CMA result was restricted to monosomic mosaicism for these cases.

CONCLUSION

Both karyotype and CMA analysis can be used to detect aneuploid chromosome mosaicism. However, the two methods produced different results. CMA and karyotype analysis have their own advantages in detecting aneuploid mosaicism, and the combination of these methods provides a more rigorous diagnosis.

Chromosomal Mosaicism in Human Feto-Placental Development: Implications for Prenatal Diagnosis

Chromosomal mosaicism is one of the primary interpretative issues in prenatal diagnosis. In this review, the mechanisms underlying feto-placental chromosomal mosaicism are presented. Based on the substantial retrospective diagnostic experience with chorionic villi samples (CVS) of a prenatal diagnosis laboratory the following items are discussed: (i) The frequency of the different types of mosaicism (confined placental, CPM, and true fetal mosaicisms, TFM); (ii) The risk of fetal confirmation after the detection of a mosaic in CVS stratified by chromosome abnormality and placental tissue involvement; (iii) The frequency of uniparental disomy for imprinted chromosomes associated with CPM; (iv) The incidence of false-positive and false-negative results in CVS samples analyzed by only (semi-)direct preparation or long term culture; and (v) The implications of the presence of a feto-placental mosaicism for microarray analysis of CVS and non-invasive prenatal screening (NIPS).