Liu Y, Sun XC, Lv GJ, Liu JH, Sun C, Mu K. Amniotic fluid karyotype analysis and prenatal diagnosis strategy of 3117 pregnant women with amniocentesis indication.
J Comp Eff Res 2023;
12:e220168. [PMID:
37256256 PMCID:
PMC10402904 DOI:
10.57264/cer-2022-0168]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/15/2022] [Accepted: 05/22/2023] [Indexed: 06/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Aim: To examine prenatal diagnosis strategies through fetal karyotype analysis for 3117 pregnant women with genetic amniocentesis indications. Materials & methods: According to the different indications for amniocentesis, the study was divided into 8 groups. The number of amniocentesis specimens, the number of abnormal karyotypes and the positive rate of each group were analyzed. Results: Compared with prenatal serum screening, noninvasive prenatal DNA testing is more accurate and can effectively improve screening efficiency. Multiple prenatal diagnosis indicators (37.349%) were more likely to be detected than single prenatal diagnosis indicators (11.091%). Conclusion: None of the screening methods can completely replace amniocentesis, and for pregnant women with genetic indications for amniocentesis, amniocentesis is strongly recommended.
Collapse