PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
December 5, 2012New England Journal of Medicine305 citationsOpen Access

Karyotype versus Microarray Testing for Genetic Abnormalities after Stillbirth

View Full Paper
URUma M. ReddyGPGrier P. PageGSGeorge R. Saade

Key Points

  • To compare the diagnostic utility of chromosomal microarray analysis with standard karyotype analysis for identifying genetic abnormalities in stillbirths.
  • Comparative diagnostic evaluation of genetic yield between microarray analysis and karyotyping in stillbirth specimens.
  • Assessed testing efficacy across tissue types, including nonviable samples, and in cases with congenital anomalies or uninformative karyotypes.
  • Microarray analysis was more likely to yield a definitive genetic diagnosis compared with standard karyotype analysis.
  • The diagnostic advantage of microarray testing was primarily driven by its ability to successfully analyze nonviable tissue and resolve cases with congenital anomalies or failed karyotypes.

Abstract

Microarray analysis is more likely than karyotype analysis to provide a genetic diagnosis, primarily because of its success with nonviable tissue, and is especially valuable in analyses of stillbirths with congenital anomalies or in cases in which karyotype results cannot be obtained. (Funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.).

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Reddy et al. (2012) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69db868f78a3e0e28868530dhttps://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa1201569
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper