14. The effectiveness of SNP Array in detecting genetic abnormalities associated with intrauterine growth restriction

Nguyen Phuong Tu, Hoang Thi Ngoc Lan, Tran Danh Cuong

Main Article Content

Abstract

Intrauterine growth restriction is a common and complex obstetric syndrome, which could lead to severe complications if it is related to genetic abnormalities. Early diagnosis of fetal growth restriction, as well as understanding their underlying genetic causes can be useful in monitoring and future treatment. Our research was conducted at the National Hospital of Obstetrics and Gynecology, from 2021 to 2023 with the aim to determine the genetic makeup of fetal growth restriction. We utilised the descriptive retrospective research method on the set of intrauterin growth restriction case files diagnosed through ultrasound, and was instructed to perform amniotic test for further chromosomal analysis of abnormalities. Results featured 153 cases of fetal growth restriction, average gestational age 28.75 ± 5.48 weeks, 46% of cases were diagnosed with growth restriction before 29 weeks, 51% of which had amniocentesis performed. 35.89% had genetic abnormalities, the rate of genetic abnormalities in 153 cases of IUGR in this study was 18.3% and the SNP Array test found 18 more cases with abnormalities that were missed by karyotype (64.28%). Research shows that SNP Array testing is effective in finding and identifying potential genetic abnormalities in intrauterine growth restriction and should be recommended in cases of fetal growth restriction with developingrisk factors or with morphological abnormalities on ultrasound.

Article Details

References

1. Committee on Practice Bulletins--Gynecology A. Intrauterine growth restriction. Clinical management guidelines for obstetrician-gynecologists. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics. 2001; 72 (1), 85.
2. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ Committee on Practice Bulletins-Obstetrics and the Society forMaternal-FetalMedicin. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 204: Fetal Growth Restriction. Obstetrics and gynecology. 2019; 133(2), e97–e109. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000003070.
3. Zhu, H., Lin, S., Huang, L., He, Z., Huang, X., Zhou, Y., ... & Luo, Y. Application of chromosomal microarray analysis in prenatal diagnosis of fetal growth restriction. Prenatal Diagnosis. 2016; 36(7), 686-692.
4. Trịnh Văn Bảo,Trần Thị Thanh Hương. Di truyền Y Học [Genetic Medicine], Nhà xuất bản giáo dục [Education Publisher]; 2012.
5. Dugoff L Norton M E, Kuller J A & Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM.). The use of chromosomal microarray for prenatal diagnosis. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology. 2016; 215(4), B2-B9.
6. Breman A Pursley A N, Hixson, P Bi W, Ward P Bacino C A & Van den Veyver, I. Prenatal chromosomal microarray analysis in a diagnostic laboratory; experience with > 1000 cases and review of the literature. Prenatal diagnosis. 2012; 32(4), 351-361.
7. Ganapathi M Nahum O & Levy B Prenatal diagnosis using chromosomal SNP microarrays. Prenatal Diagnosis. 2019; 187-205.
8. Borrell A, Grande M, Pauta M, Rodriguez-Revenga L & Figueras F. Chromosomal microarray analysis in fetuses with growth restriction and normal karyotype: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy. 2018; 44(1), 1-9.
9. Srebniak MI, Joosten M, Knapen M, Arends LR, Polak M, van Veen S, et al. Frequency of submicroscopic chromosomal aberrations in pregnancies without increased risk for structural chromosomal aberrations: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018; 51(4):445-52.
10. Grande M, Jansen FA, Blumenfeld YJ, Fisher A, Odibo AO, Haak MC, Borrell
11. A. Genomic microarray in fetuses with increased nuchal translucency and normal karyotype: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015; 46: 650–8. doi:10.1002/uog.14880.
12. Shaffer LG, Rosenfeld JA, Dabell MP, Coppinger J, Bandholz AM, Ellison JW, Ravnan JB, Torchia BS, Ballif BC, Fisher AJ. Detection rates of clinically significant genomic alterations by microarray analysis for specific anomalies detected by ultrasound. Prenat Diagn. 2012; 32: 986-95. doi:10.1002/pd.3943.
13. Wapner RJ, Martin CL, Levy B, et al.Chromosomal microarray versus karyotyping for prenatal diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2012; 367: 2175–2184.
14. Callaway JL, Shaffer LG, Chitty LS, et al. The clinical utility of microarray technologies applied to prenatal cytogenetics in the presence of a normal conventional karyotype: a review of the literature. Prenat Diagn. 2013; 33:1119–1123.
15. Wapner RJ, Martin CL, Levy B, et al. Chromosomal microarray versus karyotyping for prenatal diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2012; 367:2175–84. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1203382.