The application and significance in prenatal diagnosis using G-banding, fluorescence in situ hybridization and comparative genomic hybridization

• Published in: Zhonghua yi xue yi chuan xue za zhi Vol. 26; no. 2; p. 156
• Main Authors: Zhang, Wei-she, Chen, Qi-neng, Wu, Xin-hua, Liang, Qing-hua
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: Chinese
• Published: China 01.04.2009
• Subjects: Chromosome Aberrations - statistics & numerical data; Chromosome Banding - methods; Chromosome Disorders - diagnosis; Chromosome Disorders - genetics; Chromosomes, Human, Pair 18; Comparative Genomic Hybridization - methods; Female; Fetus; Gestational Age; Humans; In Situ Hybridization, Fluorescence; Intellectual Disability - genetics; Karyotyping - methods; Male; Nucleic Acid Hybridization - methods; Pregnancy; Prenatal Diagnosis - statistics & numerical data; Risk Factors; Ultrasonography, Prenatal - methods
• ISSN: 1003-9406
• DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1003-9406.2009.02.008

To investigate the procedure and the value of G-banding, fluorescence in sit hybridization (FISH) and comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) techniques in prenatal diagnosis. Karyotype analyses with three diagnostic procedures, G-banding, G-banding and FISH, G-banding, FISH and CGH, were performed in the amniotic fluid samples taken from 102 fetuses at gestational ages 16-24 weeks. And the significance was valued in prenatal diagnosis. In the first procedure of karyotype analysis, 98 cases were diagnosed, 2 cases were not conformed while 2 cases were failed in all 102 cases. In the second procedure, 2 cases were determined, 1 case was not conformed and 1 case was still failed. In the third step, 2 cases were diagnosed. The diagnostic rate of the karyotype reached to 100% (102/102 cases) using all the three procedures. In total, seven cases with chromosomal abnormality were diagnosed. Four cases, 1 case and 2 cases were identified in the first step (4/7, 57.1%), the second (1/7, 14.3%) and the third (2/7, 28.