Pregnancies with trisomy 2 cells in chorionic villi: Ultrasound determines the outcome

Prenatal Detection of Trisomy 2: Considerations for Genetic Counseling and Testing

We report on the case of prenatal detection of trisomy 2 in placental biopsy and further algorithm of genetic counseling and testing. A 29-year-old woman with first-trimester biochemical markers refused chorionic villus sampling and preferred targeted non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT), which showed low risk for aneuploidies 13, 18, 21, and X. A series of ultrasound examinations revealed increased chorion thickness at 13/14 weeks of gestation and fetal growth retardation, a hyperechoic bowel, challenging visualization of the kidneys, dolichocephaly, ventriculomegaly, increase in placental thickness, and pronounced oligohydramnios at 16/17 weeks of gestation. The patient was referred to our center for an invasive prenatal diagnosis. The patient's blood and placenta were sampled for whole-genome sequencing-based NIPT and array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH), respectively. Both investigations revealed trisomy 2. Further prenatal genetic testing in order to confirm trisomy 2 in amniocytes and/or fetal blood was highly questionable because oligohydramnios and fetal growth retardation made amniocentesis and cordocentesis technically unfeasible. The patient opted to terminate the pregnancy. Pathological examination of the fetus revealed internal hydrocephalus, atrophy of brain structure, and craniofacial dysmorphism. Conventional cytogenetic analysis and fluorescence in situ hybridization revealed chromosome 2 mosaicism with a prevalence of trisomic clone in the placenta (83.2% vs. 16.8%) and a low frequency of trisomy 2, which did not exceed 0.6% in fetal tissues, advocating for low-level true fetal mosaicism. To conclude, in pregnancies at risk of fetal chromosomal abnormalities that refuse invasive prenatal diagnosis, whole-genome sequencing-based NIPT, but not targeted NIPT, should be considered. In prenatal cases of trisomy 2, true mosaicism should be distinguished from placental-confined mosaicism using cytogenetic analysis of amniotic fluid cells or fetal blood cells. However, if material sampling is impossible due to oligohydramnios and/or fetal growth retardation, further decisions should be based on a series of high-resolution fetal ultrasound examinations. Genetic counseling for the risk of uniparental disomy in a fetus is also required.

Pregnancy outcome of confined placental mosaicism: meta-analysis of cohort studies

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the rate of adverse obstetrical and neonatal outcomes in pregnancies diagnosed with confined placental mosaicism relative to that of unaffected controls.

DATA SOURCES

Web-based databases were searched using relevant key words, and articles published from 1980 to February 2022 were retrieved.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Observational studies in English language including ≥10 cases of singleton pregnancies with diagnosis of confined placental mosaicism were included. The diagnosis was established after detection of any chromosomal abnormality at chorionic villus sampling for any indication, followed by normal karyotype from amniotic fluid or neonatal leukocyte culture.

METHODS

Two authors independently screened the references for eligibility, data extraction, and assessment of methodological quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. All available obstetrical and neonatal outcomes were recorded. Random-effect meta-analysis was performed to estimate pooled odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals of available outcomes in pregnancies with and without confined placental mosaicism. Statistical heterogeneity was evaluated with I2 statistics (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews registration number: CRD42021260319).

RESULTS

Of the 80 articles reviewed, 8 retrospective matched-cohort studies (708 cases of confined placental mosaicism and 11,599 unaffected controls) compared cases with and without confined placental mosaicism and were included in the meta-analysis. The risk of delivering small-for-gestational-age neonates was significantly increased in confined placental mosaicism pregnancies according to crude analysis (odds ratio, 2.45; 95% confidence interval, 1.23-4.89; I2=72%) and to sensitivity analysis of high-quality studies (odds ratio, 3.65; 95% confidence interval, 2.43-5.57; I2=0%). Similarly, confined placental mosaicism resulted in an increased risk of birthweight below the third centile (odds ratio, 5.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.19-24.19; I2= 83%). Subgroup analysis revealed that the risk of delivering small-for-gestational-age neonates was 3-fold higher for confined placental mosaicism excluding trisomy 16, and 11-fold higher for cases including trisomy 16 only vs unaffected controls, respectively. No difference was found in the risk of low birthweight and preterm birth (at <37 weeks' gestation). Other outcomes were insufficiently reported, therefore they were not analyzed.

CONCLUSION

Pregnant women prenatally diagnosed with confined placental mosaicism have an increased risk of impaired fetal growth, suggesting the need for intensified antenatal surveillance.