Performance of Chromosomal Microarray Analysis for Detection of Copy Number Variations in Fetal Echogenic Bowel

References

• Sepulveda W, Sebire NJ. Fetal echogenic bowel: a complex scenario. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2000;16(6):510–514. doi:10.1046/j.1469-0705.2000.00322.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maillet L, Rudigoz RC, Buffin R, Massardier J, Gaucherand P, Huissoud C. Neonatal outcome of fetal hyperechogenic bowel. Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2014;42(6):383–386. doi:10.1016/j.gyobfe.2014.01.006
   Google Scholar
• Kesrouani AK, Guibourdenche J, Muller F, et al. Etiology and outcome of fetal echogenic bowel. Ten years of experience. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2003;18(4):240–246. doi:10.1159/000070803
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Findley R, Allen VM, Brock JK. Adverse perinatal conditions associated with prenatally detected fetal echogenic bowel in Nova Scotia. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2018;40(5):555–560. doi:10.1016/j.jogc.2017.09.017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D’Amico A, Buca D, Rizzo G, et al. Outcome of fetal echogenic bowel: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prenat Diagn. 2020.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bashiri A, Burstein E, Hershkowitz R, Mazor M. Fetal echogenic bowel by ultrasound: what is the clinical significance? Harefuah. 2007;146(12):964–969, 996–997.
   Google Scholar
• Strocker AM, Snijders RJ, Carlson DE, et al. Fetal echogenic bowel: parameters to be considered in differential diagnosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2000;16(6):519–523. doi:10.1046/j.1469-0705.2000.00241.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ronin C, Mace P, Stenard F, et al. Antenatal prognostic factor of fetal echogenic bowel. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2017;212:166–170. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.01.060
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levy B, Wapner R. Prenatal diagnosis by chromosomal microarray analysis. Fertil Steril. 2018;109(2):201–212. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.01.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stosic M, Levy B, Wapner R. The use of chromosomal microarray analysis in prenatal diagnosis. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2018;45(1):55–68. doi:10.1016/j.ogc.2017.10.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xie Y, Sun X. Chromosomal microarray analysis in prenatal diagnosis. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2017;44(2):177–179.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wapner RJ, Martin CL, Levy B, et al. Chromosomal microarray versus karyotyping for prenatal diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(23):2175–2184. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1203382
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Song T, Wan S, Li Y, et al. Detection of copy number variants using chromosomal microarray analysis for the prenatal diagnosis of congenital heart defects with normal karyotype. J Clin Lab Anal. 2019;33(1):e22630. doi:10.1002/jcla.22630
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patel Y, Boyd PA, Chamberlain P, Lakhoo K. Follow-up of children with isolated fetal echogenic bowel with particular reference to bowel-related symptoms. Prenat Diagn. 2004;24(1):35–37. doi:10.1002/pd.787
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ekin A, Gezer C, Taner CE, Ozeren M. The effect of associated structural malformations in the prediction of chromosomal abnormality risk of fetuses with echogenic bowel. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016;29(1):41–45. doi:10.3109/14767058.2014.986091
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tan HH, Tan VC, Yeo GS. A case series of gastrointestinal abnormalities in fetuses with echogenic bowel detected during the antenatal period. Ann Acad Med Singap. 2003;32(5):649–652.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Imon-Bouy B, Satre V, Ferec C, et al.; French Collaborative Group. Hyperechogenic fetal bowel: a large French collaborative study of 682 cases. Am J Med Genet A. 2003;121A(3):209–213. doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.20168
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grijseels EW, Cohen-Overbeek TE, Adama van Scheltema PN, et al. Sonomarkers: subtle ultrasound findings in the 20-week ultrasound examination, which have a low association with some chromosomal and non-chromosomal abnormalities in the fetus. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2008;152(41):2225–2231.
   Google Scholar
• Buiter HD, Holswilder-Olde Scholtenhuis MA, Bouman K, van Baren R, Bilardo CM, Bos AF. Outcome of infants presenting with echogenic bowel in the second trimester of pregnancy. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2013;98(3):F256–F259. doi:10.1136/archdischild-2012-302017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang SY, Du J, Huang J, Ling HY, Meng DH. Prenatal diagnosis of fetal echogenic bowel and its clinical significance. Matern Child Health Care Chin. 2013;28(18):3015–3017.
   Google Scholar
• Crawford D, Dearmun A. Klinefelter syndrome. Nurs Child Young People. 2017;29(6):19. doi:10.7748/ncyp.29.6.19.s21
   Google Scholar
• Bird RJ, Hurren BJ. Anatomical and clinical aspects of Klinefelter’s syndrome. Clin Anat. 2016;29(5):606–619. doi:10.1002/ca.22695
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berlin BM, Norton ME, Sugarman EA, Tsipis JE, Allitto BA. Cystic fibrosis and chromosome abnormalities associated with echogenic fetal bowel. Obstet Gynecol. 1999;94(1):135–138. doi:10.1016/s0029-7844(99)00286-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dagklis T, Plasencia W, Maiz N, Duarte L, Nicolaides KH. Choroid plexus cyst, intracardiac echogenic focus, hyperechogenic bowel and hydronephrosis in screening for trisomy 21 at 11 + 0 to 13 + 6 weeks. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2008;31(2):132–135. doi:10.1002/uog.5224
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langer JC. Hirschsprung disease. Curr Opin Pediatr. 2013;25(3):368–374. doi:10.1097/MOP.0b013e328360c2a0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang XJ, Camilleri M. Hirschsprung disease: insights on genes, penetrance, and prenatal diagnosis. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2019;31(11):e13732. doi:10.1111/nmo.13732
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wester T, Granström AL. Hirschsprung disease-bowel function beyond childhood. Semin Pediatr Surg. 2017;26(5):322–327. doi:10.1053/j.sempedsurg.2017.09.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amiel J, Sproat-Emison E, Garcia-Barcelo M, et al.; Hirschsprung Disease Consortium. Hirschsprung disease, associated syndromes and genetics: a review. J Med Genet. 2008;45(1):1–14. doi:10.1136/jmg.2007.053959
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Kovel CG, Trucks H, Helbig I, et al. Recurrent microdeletions at 15q11.2 and 16p13.11 predispose to idiopathic generalized epilepsies. Brain. 2010;133(Pt 1):23–32. doi:10.1093/brain/awp262
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith AE, Jnah A, Newberry D. Chromosome 16p13.11 microdeletion syndrome in a newborn: a Case Study. Neonatal Netw. 2018;37(5):303–309. doi:10.1891/0730-0832.37.5.303
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tan L, Bi B, Zhao P, et al. Severe congenital microcephaly with 16p13.11 microdeletion combined with NDE1 mutation, a case report and literature review. BMC Med Genet. 2017;18(1):141. doi:10.1186/s12881-017-0501-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Isselbacher EM, Lino Cardenas CL, Lindsay ME. Hereditary influence in thoracic aortic aneurysm and dissection. Circulation. 2016;133(24):2516–2528. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.116.009762
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Takeda N, Morita H, Fujita D, et al. A deleterious MYH11 mutation causing familial thoracic aortic dissection. Hum Genome Var. 2015;2(1):15028. doi:10.1038/hgv.2015.28
   Google Scholar
• Bradshaw NJ. Cloning of the promoter of NDE1, a gene implicated in psychiatric and neurodevelopmental disorders through copy number variation. Neuroscience. 2016;324:262–270. doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2016.03.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allach El Khattabi L, Heide S, Caberg JH, et al. 16p13.11 microduplication in 45 new patients: refined clinical significance and genotype-phenotype correlations. J Med Genet. 2020;57(5):301–307. doi:10.1136/jmedgenet-2018-105389
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheuvens R, Begemann M, Soellner L, et al. Maternal uniparental disomy of chromosome 16 [upd(16)mat]: clinical features are rather caused by (hidden) trisomy 16 mosaicism than by upd(16)mat itself. Clin Genet. 2017;92(1):45–51. doi:10.1111/cge.12958
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang H, Luo C, Liu Y, et al. UPD16 itself is not a cause of intrauterine growth restriction. Fetal Pediatr Pathol. 2018;37(6):452–464. doi:10.1080/15513815.2018.1538275
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yong PJ, Marion SA, Barrett IJ, Kalousek DK, Robinson WP. Evidence for imprinting on chromosome 16: the effect of uniparental disomy on the outcome of mosaic trisomy 16 pregnancies. Am J Med Genet. 2002;112(2):123–132. doi:10.1002/ajmg.10702
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Desai P, Haber H, Bulafka J, et al. Impacts of variants of uncertain significance on parental perceptions of children after prenatal chromosome microarray testing. Prenat Diagn. 2018;38(10):740–747. doi:10.1002/pd.5323
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dugoff L, Norton ME, Kuller JA; Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM). The use of chromosomal microarray for prenatal diagnosis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;215(4):B2–B9. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2016.07.016
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swarna M, Sujatha M, Rani PU, Reddy PP. Detection of L1 CAM mutation in a male child with mental retardation. Indian J Clin Biochem. 2004;19(2):163–167. doi:10.1007/BF02894278
   Google Scholar
• Gonzales ML, LaSalle JM. The role of MeCP2 in brain development and neurodevelopmental disorders. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2010;12(2):127–134. doi:10.1007/s11920-010-0097-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kosma K, Mitrakos A, Sofokleous C, et al. A female patient with Xq28 microduplication presenting with myotubular myopathy, confirmed with a custom-designed X-array. Neuropediatrics. 2019;50(1):61–63. doi:10.1055/s-0038-1676513
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang Y, Hu P, Xu Z. Copy number variations and fetal ventriculomegaly. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2018;30(2):104–110. doi:10.1097/GCO.0000000000000439
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu P, Wang Y, Sun R, et al. Copy number variations with isolated fetal ventriculomegaly. Curr Mol Med. 2017;17(2):133–139. doi:10.2174/1566524017666170303125529
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar