Abstract
Objectives
This study aims to assess the value of copy number variation sequencing (CNV-seq) in prenatal diagnosis of abnormal ultrasound markers to reduce fetal birth defects.
Methods
Between June 2021 and December 2022, Yulin Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital examined 295 pregnant women with abnormal ultrasound indicators. We were categorized by the number of abnormalities and age. Karyotype analysis and CNV-seq were conducted, and the CNV-seq detection rate was statistically analyzed.
Results
CNV-seq detected abnormal chromosomes in 43 out of 295 pregnant women with abnormal fetal ultrasound soft indicators, resulting in a detection rate of 14.58 %, compared to 5.76 % with traditional karyotype analysis. CNV-seq identified all aneuploidy abnormalities found by karyotype analysis and an additional 5 abnormalities, increasing the detection rate by 1.69 %. However, CNV-seq missed one case of chromosome equilibrium translocation. The detection rate of CNV-seq in fetuses with Several abnormal soft indexes was 29.41 %, significantly higher than individual soft indexes (p<0.05). The study compared abnormality rates of single and multiple ultrasound soft markers in two age groups. Abnormal detection rates were 12.38 % for the younger group and 13.73 % for the older group, with no significant difference. However, the younger group had a significantly higher detection rate for multiple soft markers compared to the older group (χ2=5.517, p<0.05).
Conclusions
CNV-seq technology is valuable for identifying fetuses with abnormal soft markers, guiding its future use in perinatal diagnosis and aiding clinical genetic counseling.
Introduction
Prenatal ultrasound is essential for prenatal screening and diagnosis due to its non-invasive nature, minimal radiation, and safety for the fetus. It helps assess fetal health, identify structural abnormalities, and detect subtle anatomical variations. Ultrasonic soft markers (USM) in prenatal ultrasound help assess fetal health by indicating potential chromosomal abnormalities. These markers are not definitive structural issues but may reflect normal variations or temporary changes during pregnancy. While they can’t diagnose chromosomal abnormalities, they can signal possible risks. Certain soft marker abnormalities are closely associated with specific diseases, and when combined with certain high-risk factors, they can increase the likelihood of chromosomal abnormalities [1], 2].
Research shows a strong link between chromosomal abnormalities and abnormal soft markers. For example, many fetuses with trisomy 21 have high nuchal translucency (NT) values [3], often linked to congenital heart disease. Similarly, trisomy 18 fetuses frequently develop choroid plexus cysts (CPC) [4]. The diagnostic specificity of abnormal ultrasound soft markers for fetal chromosomal abnormalities is low. Therefore, advancing prenatal analysis techniques is essential to improve diagnostic accuracy and support clinical diagnosis and treatment.
Next-generation sequencing (CNV-seq) offers a new, efficient method for prenatal diagnosis. It is user-friendly, highly automated, fast, high-throughput, requires minimal DNA (10 ng), provides high resolution (100 kb accuracy), and can detect low-level chimeras [5], 6]. Notably, experts have suggested that CNV-seq technology, given its capabilities, can serve as a primary prenatal diagnostic tool in clinical settings [7]. CNV-Seq analysis is crucial for prenatal diagnosis, especially in high-risk pregnancies, as it accurately detects chromosomal abnormalities. However, few studies have explored its use in patients with abnormal ultrasound soft markers. This study aims to explore the use of CNV-seq technology to identify chromosomal abnormalities in pregnant women with abnormal ultrasound indicators, addressing a critical need in improving clinical decision-making strategies.
Materials and methods
Between June 2021 and December 2022, 295 pregnant women with abnormal prenatal ultrasound indicators were studied at Yulin Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital. They underwent either amniocentesis (245 cases) or umbilical cord blood sampling (50 cases). Participants’ ages ranged from 16 to 44 years, averaging 30.05 years. Participants’ gestational ages ranged from 16 to 37 weeks, averaging 20 weeks and 8 days. Karyotype analysis, CNV-seq detection, and STR experiments were performed on all samples to confirm fetal origin and exclude maternal contamination. Informed consent was obtained from pregnant women before invasive prenatal diagnosis procedures, including amniocentesis or umbilical cord blood sampling, and was reiterated verbally. The Obstetrical Ethics Committee of Yulin Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital approved the study, ensuring strict confidentiality and protection of patient data.
The study included pregnant women with singleton pregnancies showing abnormal ultrasonic soft indicators, which were reviewed by senior experts in the Ultrasound Department at Yulin Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital. The study excluded pregnant women with fetal structural abnormalities detected by ultrasound, those who had invasive prenatal diagnosis following abnormal noninvasive prenatal testing (NITP) results, and those with multiple pregnancies.
Grouping
Based on various ultrasonic soft indicators, 295 pregnant women were categorized into a single abnormal soft indicators group and a multiple abnormal soft indicators group. The single abnormal soft indicators group was further divided into 12 sub-groups based on the type of abnormality.
CNV-Seq sequencing analysis
Samples from pregnant women with abnormal ultrasound soft markers were collected via amniotic fluid or umbilical cord blood aspiration. DNA was extracted and analyzed using CNV-seq with second-generation sequencing. The sequencing results were compared to the human reference genome to identify chromosomal aneuploidies and copy number variations through bioinformatics analysis.
Pathogenicity interpretation of CNV
The results were interpreted using databases like OMIM, DECIPHER, NCBI, DGV, GeneCards, and UCSC. According to ACMG guidelines, CNVs were classified as clear pathogenic, probably pathogenic, probably benign, VOUS, or benign [8].
Statistical analysis
Data analysis was performed using SPSS 26.0(IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Chi-square tests compared inter-group rates, with p<0.05 indicating statistical significance. Age correlation was assessed using Pearson correlation.
Results
In this study, 295 pregnant women with abnormal fetal ultrasound indicators underwent successful prenatal diagnosis: 50 via umbilical cord blood and 245 via amniotic fluid. Both chromosomal karyotype analysis and CNV-seq detection achieved a 100 % success rate.
Prenatal CNV-seq and karyotype analysis for fetuses with abnormal ultrasound soft markers
Out of 295 pregnant women with abnormal fetal ultrasound soft markers, CNV-seq detected abnormal chromosomes in 43 cases, yielding a 14.58 % detection rate. This included 17 cases of chromosome aneuploidy and 26 cases of copy number variations. Among the aneuploidy cases, there were 13 instances of trisomy 21, one of trisomy 18, and one each of 45, X; 47, XYY; and 47, XYY/46, XY. Among the 26 observed copy number variations, four were clearly pathogenic, one was potentially pathogenic due to micro-duplication, 13 had unknown clinical significance, three were potentially benign, and five were benign.
Conventional karyotype analysis of 295 cases identified abnormalities in 17 cases (5.76 %), including trisomy 18 (1 case), trisomy 21 (13 cases), Turner syndrome (45,X) (1 case), a 47,XYY/46,XY chimera (1 case), and a 46,Xn,t(16;17)mat case (1 case). Additionally, 19 cases (6.44 %) showed chromosomal polymorphisms, including 5 cases of 46,Xn,inv(9)(p12q13) and 4 cases of 46,X,inv(Y)(p11q11), which were not classified as abnormal karyotypes.
In detecting chromosomal abnormalities, the low-depth CNV-seq method had a 14.58 % detection rate, compared to 5.76 % for karyotyping. Combining both methods increased the rate to 14.92 %. These differences were statistically significant (χ2=15.319, p<0.001), with a notable difference between the CNV-seq and karyotyping groups (χ2=12.542, p<0.001). Furthermore, combining CNV-seq with karyotyping showed a significant difference compared to karyotyping alone (χ2=13.329, p<0.001), but no significant difference was found when compared to CNV-seq alone (χ2=0.013, p=0.908), as indicated in Table 1.
Results of three methods.
Section | Normal number of cases | Number of exception cases detected | Detection rate | χ2 | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Chromosome karyotype analysis | 278 | 17 | 5.76 % | ||
CNV-seq | 252 | 43 | 14.58 % | 15.391 | p<0.001 |
Chromosome karyotype analysis+CNV-seq | 251 | 44 | 14.92 % |
Comparison of CNV-seq and karyotype analysis results in ultrasound soft markers
CNV-seq effectively detected chromosomal abnormalities in various ultrasound findings, with a 40 % detection rate in renal pelvis dilation cases. Detection rates were 33.33 % for ventricular hyperechoic spot, 28.57 % for posterior cranial fossa widening, 20.69 % for intestinal echo enhancement or dilation, 16.67 % for vagal right subclavian artery, and 14.30 % for lateral ventricular widening. The study revealed a 13.89 % detection rate of chromosomal abnormalities in the nasal bone and a 10.83 % rate in NT. No abnormalities were found in ultrasound soft markers like NF thickening, choroid cyst, single umbilical artery, femoral shortening, and tricuspid valve regurgitation. However, combining multiple soft marker abnormalities resulted in a 29.41 % detection rate, significantly higher than the 12.64 % rate for a single soft marker abnormality (p<0.05) (see Tables 2 and 3).
The results of CNV-seq and karyotype analysis in the abnormal soft index of ultrasound.
Type of ultrasound soft index abnormality | Examples | Abnormal karyotype detection | CNV-seq was abnormal |
---|---|---|---|
The number of instances (proportion) | The number of instances (proportion) | ||
A single soft indicator exception | 261 | 8 (3.07 %) | 33 (12.64 %) |
NT abnormality | 120 | 4 (3.33 %) | 13 (10.83 %) |
Nasal bone not shown or not shown clearly | 36 | 4 (11.11 %) | 5 (13.89 %) |
The intestinal echo is enhanced or dilated | 29 | 0 | 6 (20.69 %) |
Lateral ventricles widened | 21 | 0 | 3 (14.30 %) |
CPC | 17 | 0 | 0 |
Single umbilical artery | 10 | 0 | 0 |
The posterior fossa widened | 7 | 0 | 2 (28.57 %) |
Vagus subclavian artery | 6 | 0 | 1 (16.67 %) |
Mild dilatation of the renal pelvis | 5 | 0 | 2 (40 %) |
NF thickening | 4 | 0 | 0 |
Ventricular strong echo spot | 3 | 0 | 1 (33.33 %) |
Short femur | 2 | 0 | 0 |
Tricuspid regurgitation | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Several soft index anomalies were merged | 34 | 9 (26.47 %) | 10 (29.41 %) |
Total | 295 | 17 (5.76 %) | 43 (14.58 %) |
-
Chromosome polymorphism is not included in karyotype abnormality. NT, nuchal translucency; NF, nuchal fold.
The results of CNV-seq in single soft index abnormality and multiple soft index abnormality.
Project | Number of cases (n=295) | |
---|---|---|
Normal | Exception | |
Single soft indicator | 228 | 33 |
A combination of multiple soft indicators | 24 | 10 |
Karyotyping identified 16 aneuploidy abnormalities, while CNV-seq detected 17. Both methods agreed on 13 cases of trisomy 21, 1 case of trisomy 18, and 1 case of Turner syndrome. CNV-seq gave inconsistent results for one 47, XYY/46, XY case and one 47, XYY case, whereas karyotyping missed one 47, XYY/46, XY chimera case. CNV-seq identified 21 pathogenic CNVs (including 16 aneuploidy cases), representing 7.12 % of the total and covering all chromosomal karyotype aneuploidy findings. Additionally, CNV-seq detected five more chromosomal abnormalities (1 case of 47, XYY/46, XY chimera, three microdeletions, and one microduplication), accounting for 1.69 % of the total. There was one potential pathogenic chromosomal variation with a dilated renal pelvis and separation. Additionally, there were 13 clinically unclear cases: five with nuchal translucency thickening, four with enhanced fetal bowel echo, two with absent fetal nasal bone, one with posterior fossa cistern widening, and one with renal pelvis dilation. The study found three potential benign variations: one with NT thickening, one with lateral ventricular dilation, and one with two soft marker abnormalities. Additionally, five benign variations were identified: two with lateral ventricular dilation, one with fetal ventricular focal light, one with fetal bowel echo enhancement, and one with posterior fossa cistern widening. The CNV-seq detection technology failed to successfully identify the structural abnormality of one case exhibiting balanced translocation of chromosomes. The CNV-seq detection technology failed to successfully identify the structural abnormality of one case exhibiting balanced translocation of chromosomes (see Appendix, Table A1).
Influence of abnormal soft index combined with advanced age on the detection of chromosomal abnormalities
The samples were divided into two age groups: under 35 years (young) and 35 years and above (old). Out of 295 cases, 236 were in the young group and 59 in the old group. Karyotype analysis found chromosomal abnormalities in eight young cases (3.39 %) and nine old cases (15.25 %). Notably, the abnormal rate in the young group was significantly lower than that in the old group, as evidenced by a statistically significant difference (χ2=10.233, p=0.001). Among the 236 cases in the younger age group, 31 cases were identified as having chromosomal abnormalities through CNV-seq analysis. Similarly, among the 59 cases in the older age group, 12 cases exhibited chromosomal abnormalities. The respective abnormal rates were calculated as 13.14 and 20.34 %. Notably, the abnormal rate in the younger group was observed to be lower than that in the older group, although this difference was not statistically significant (χ2=1.414, p=0.234). In the young group, out of the 236 cases, 31 cases were identified with chromosomal abnormalities through the utilization of karyotype analysis+CNV-seq. Similarly, among the 59 cases in the old group, 13 cases were detected with chromosomal abnormalities. The respecrtive abnormal detection rates were calculated as 13.14 % (31 out of 236) and 22.03 % (13 out of 59). It is worth noting that the abnormal rate in the young group was observed to be lower compared to the old group, although this difference was not found to be statistically significant (χ2=2.086, p=0.149), as presented in Table 4.
Results of three methods in the younger and older age groups.
Project | Young age group (n=236) | Elderly group (n=59) | χ2 | p-Value | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Normal | Exception | Normal | Exception | |||
Traditional chromosome karyotype | 228 | 8 | 50 | 9 | 10.233 | <0.001 |
CNV-seq | 205 | 31 | 47 | 12 | 1.414 | 0.234 |
Traditional chromosome karyotype+CNV-seq | 205 | 31 | 46 | 13 | 2.086 | 0.149 |
In a study on elderly women, CNV-seq identified three additional chromosomal abnormalities compared to conventional karyotyping: one in the NT thickening group, one in the intestinal echo enhancement group, and one in the multiple soft index abnormalities group. However, CNV-seq missed one abnormality detected by conventional karyotyping related to unclear nasal bone display. Details are in Table 5.
The results of CNV-seq and traditional karyotype analysis in different abnormal soft indexes of the aged group.
Type of ultrasound soft index abnormality | Cases, n | Number (proportion) of abnormal karyotype detection | CNV-seq detection of abnormal cases (proportion) | Karyotype+CNV-seq detected abnormal cases |
---|---|---|---|---|
NT thickening | 24 | 2 | 4 | 4 |
The nasal bone is not clear | 10 | 3 | 2 | 3 |
The intestinal echo was enhanced | 6 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
CPC | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Lateral ventricles widened | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Single umbilical artery | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
NF thickening | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Posterior fossa cistern widened | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Single soft index anomaly | 51 | 5 | 7 | 8 |
Several soft index anomalies were merged | 8 | 4 | 5 | 5 |
Total | 59 | 9 | 12 | 13 |
-
Chromosome polymorphism is not included in chromosome karyotype abnormality. NT, nuchal translucency; NF, nuchal fold.
In the younger group, CNV-seq identified 26 cases with abnormality in single soft index, resulting in a detection rate of 12.38 % (26/210). Additionally, 5 cases with abnormality in multiple soft indexes were detected, yielding a detection rate of 19.23 % (5/26). Conversely, in the older group, CNV-seq identified 7 cases with abnormality in single soft index, resulting in a detection rate of 13.73 % (7/51). Furthermore, 5 cases with abnormality in multiple soft indexes were detected, resulting in a detection rate of 62.5 %.There was no statistically significant difference observed in the comparison of abnormality of a single soft index between the younger and older groups (χ2=0.067, p>0.05). However, a statistically significant difference was found in the comparison of abnormality of multiple soft indexes combined with abnormality of multiple soft indexes between the two groups (χ2=5.517, p<0.05). Furthermore, the abnormality rate of chromosomes in the older group was significantly higher than that in the older group combined with abnormality of multiple soft indexes, as evidenced by the data presented in Tables 5 and 6.
Comparison of CNV-seq results between the younger and older age groups.
Project | Single ultrasound soft index group (n=236) | Multiple ultrasound soft index groups were combined (n=59) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Normal | Exception | Normal | Exception | |
Young | 184 | 26 | 21 | 5 |
Old age | 44 | 7 | 3 | 5 |
χ2 | 0.067 | 5.517 | ||
p-Value | >0.05 | <0.05 |
Discussion
This study used CNV-seq technology to identify 295 pregnant women with abnormal ultrasound markers, detecting chromosomal abnormalities in 43 cases, yielding a 14.58 % detection rate. In contrast, Wang et al. [9] found a lower detection rate of 3.39 % using CNV-seq technology in a larger study of 737 pregnant women with abnormal ultrasound soft markers. Lan et al. [10] found that CNV-seq technology identified pathogenic copy number variations in 20 out of 400 ultrasound cases with abnormal soft indexes, achieving a 5 % detection rate. In our own investigation, we detected 21 cases of pathogenic CNVs, accounting for 7.12 % of the total sample, surpassing both Lan et al.’s [10] findings and those of another study conducted by Wang et al. [11]. The discrepancy might arise from differences in statistical criteria, with some studies counted only pathogenic CNVs and excluded aneuploidy abnormalities. The large variation in sample sizes of different abnormal soft indexes in the study could also be a factor. Some studies have found a higher chance of chromosomal abnormalities when certain soft markers like NT are abnormal, while most normal non-specific changes like VM have been detected under these conditions.
In a group of 295 pregnant women with abnormal ultrasound soft markers, the seven most common were thickened nuchal translucency, nasal bone issues, multiple abnormal markers, enhanced or dilated intestinal echo, lateral ventricular dilatation, CPC, and single umbilical artery. Fetal NT is the fluid buildup in the back of a fetus’s neck between 11 and 13+6 weeks of pregnancy. An NT measurement below 2.5 mm is normal, while 2.5 mm or more indicates thickening, often linked to chromosomal abnormalities [12], [13], [14]. Leung et al. noted that around 10 % of fetuses with high NT values had chromosomal variations undetectable by standard karyotyping. In our study, CNV-seq identified abnormal chromosomes in 13 out of 120 such cases, yielding a 10.83 % detection rate, aligning with Leung et al.’s findings [15]. Fetal Ventriculomegaly (VM) is characterized by ventricular chambers measuring ≥10 mm in width. Our retrospective analysis found a 14.29 % (3/21) detection rate of chromosomal abnormalities using CNV-seq in lateral VM cases, comparable to the incidence reported in isolated mild VM cases in foreign studies [16], 17]. The CNVs found in the three isolated VM cases in our study were deemed benign or possibly benign, aligning with prior research showing most fetuses with mild Ventriculomegaly had normal variations [18]. Nasal bone dysplasia is a prevalent ultrasound manifestation observed in trisomy 21 fetuses. In our study, CNV-seq detected abnormalities in five of 36 cases (13.89 %) of isolated nasal bone dysplasia, with 3 cases linked to trisomy 21, highlighting a significant correlation between nasal bone dysplasia and trisomy 21. This finding aligned with the results reported by Cicero et al. [19]. Enhanced bowel sounds (EB) were often noted in the second trimester of pregnancy, with detection rates between 0.6 and 2.4 % [20]. Using CNV-seq, our study identified six chromosome copy number variations, achieving a 20.69 % detection rate, potentially affected by sample selection bias and other factors. Notably, only one copy number variation was found to be pathogenic, and all pregnancies led to live births with no noticeable abnormalities in the first month. This result was consistent with existing literature on abnormal fetal intestinal echogenicity, though its clinical importance was unclear [21]. Additionally, Ronin et al. [22] noted that isolated intestinal echogenicity and late-pregnancy intestinal echogenicity were both strong, independent indicators of good neonatal outcomes. CPC are hemangioma-like lesions in the choroid plexus capillaries, containing cerebrospinal fluid. Research showed no significant link between isolated CPC and chromosomal abnormalities, with few studies on non-isolated CPC and such abnormalities [23], 24]. In line with existing literature, this study found no abnormal chromosomes in isolated CPC when analyzed using CNV-seq and karyotype analysis. Several studies had indicated [25] CPC were significantly linked to trisomy 18, occurring in about half of affected fetuses. In our study, we found one trisomy 18 case, marked by a CPC, increased nuchal translucency, and an abnormal single umbilical artery. Furthermore, Our study found two abnormalities in seven cases of posterior cranial fossa widening, two in five cases of renal pelvis dilation, one in three cases of ventricular hyperechoic plaque, and one in six cases of vagal right subclavian artery. These findings differ significantly from previous research, particularly due to the limited number of abnormal soft indexes liked ventricular hyperechoic plaque, observed in fewer than 10 cases. Consequently, the potential for bias in the results was substantial. Additionally, NF thickening, single umbilical artery, short femur, and tricuspid valve regurgitation were rare, and no abnormal chromosomes were found via CNV-seq or karyotype analysis, so they were not thoroughly analyzed. Our study found that when multiple abnormal ultrasound soft markers were present, CNV-seq detected abnormal chromosomes in 29.41 % of cases, compared to 12.64 % with a single soft marker. These findings suggested using CNV-seq detection when multiple ultrasound soft markers were found in fetuses, as numerous studies had linked multiple soft marker abnormalities to a higher risk of chromosomal issues. Additionally, Lu et al. [26] suggested considering invasive prenatal diagnosis for multiple soft index evaluations, but recommended avoiding unnecessary invasive tests when only a single soft index abnormality was present without high-risk factors.
CNV-seq accurately identified abnormal karyotype fragments, improving prenatal diagnosis and genetic counseling. It detected all chromosomal aneuploidies, including 13 trisomy 21 cases, one trisomy 18 case, and 1 Turner syndrome case, consistent with chromosomal karyotyping results. Notably, in the case of A221322 (see Appendix, Table A1), chromosomal karyotyping showed a 47, XYY/46, XY pattern, while CNV-seq indicated a diploid Y chromosome, resulting in a 47, XYY syndrome diagnosis. This is likely due to the nearly equal presence of two cell lines, 47, XYY[51]/46, XY[49]. Other studies [7], 27] had shown that CNV-seq results for chimeras with balanced multiple cell lines or 50 % of two aneuploid lines can vary. We suggest verifying these results with additional methods like fluorescence in situ hybridization.
CNV-seq can accurately pinpoint the source of abnormal chromosome fragments and detect chromosomal microdeletions and microduplications that karyotyping cannot. Wang et al. [11] used CNV-seq to detect abnormal soft markers in pregnant women via ultrasound, achieving a 0.97 % higher detection rate of pathogenic CNVs than karyotyping. In our study, CNV-seq identified five more pathogenic variants, outperforming karyotyping by 1.69 % and slightly surpassing Wang et al.’s results. Although CNV-seq technology has improved the detection of pathogenic copy number variations (pCNVs), it also has identified more copy number variations of uncertain significance (VOUS). This complicates genetic counseling and can cause psychological distress in pregnant women [28]. In our study, a total of 13 cases of VOUS were identified in pregnant women exhibiting abnormal soft index. The detection rate of VOUS was found to be 4.4 %, which aligns with the findings reported internationally [8], 29]. Considering various factors, including cost, only seven confirmed pathogenic and VOUS cases agreed to parental traceability analysis. Results showed 6 cases were genetically related: four maternal transmissions, two paternal transmissions, and 1 de novo mutation. Of these, 2 cases led to induced labor due to pathogenic diseases, while the rest resulted in live births. One live birth (case A222045 in Appendix Table A1, Figure A1) involved left hydronephrosis and left ureteral dilatation. The mother had a normal phenotype, and the father had a repaired congenital cleft lip. The other cases showed no abnormalities. Of the 13 cases with variants of uncertain significance (VOUS), one led to induced labor, and the other 12 resulted in live births without noticeable physical abnormalities. Using CNV-seq to detect parental DNA provides crucial insights into fetal CNV pathogenicity and variants of uncertain significance (VOUS). This method helps identify parental DNA origins, assess recurrence risks, and determines if a case is novel, aiding genetic counseling and informed decision-making for pregnant women and their families. It also supplies essential data for clinical evaluation of soft indicators.
CNV-seq cannot effectively detect balanced translocations and inversions, which are better identified through traditional karyotyping. However, it can identify chromosomal microdeletions or duplications associated with balanced translocations. In this study, CNV-seq missed a balanced translocation in one case, despite an ultrasound showing a short nasal bone abnormality in the pregnant woman. Further examination of the parents’ chromosomes revealed that the balanced translocation chromosome was inherited from the mother. Research showed that balanced translocations and inversions of chromosomes significantly contributed to reproductive issues. Additionally, about 10 % of full-term fetuses from couples with balanced translocation carriers had chromosome abnormalities, a rate higher than in the general population [30]. Additionally, balanced translocation had been linked to recurrent miscarriages [31]. In our study, a pregnant woman with balanced translocation chose to continue her pregnancy, leading to a live birth. Follow-up checks showed no abnormalities in the newborn. Due to the rare detection of balanced translocation in ultrasound soft markers, a detailed examination was not conducted.
Advanced maternal age significantly impacts the need for prenatal diagnosis, as research showed a higher rate of fetal birth defects and chromosomal abnormalities in older pregnant women compared to younger ones [32]. The present study further supports these findings, revealing a greater incidence of chromosomal abnormalities in the advanced age group compared to the young age group. Hu et al. [33] found a 21.07 % detection rate of abnormal chromosomes with an abnormal isolated soft sexual index. This rate rose to 31.16 % when combined with advanced age, a statistically significant increase compared to the non-advanced age group. This study found no significant differences (p>0.05) between older adults with an abnormal isolated soft sexual index and younger adults, unlike Hu’s [33] findings. However, a significant difference was found between older individuals with multiple soft index abnormalities and younger individuals with the same condition (p<0.05). This finding indicated a higher detection rate of chromosome abnormalities in older individuals with multiple soft index abnormalities, consistent with previous studies. Additionally, CNV-seq detected three additional chromosomal abnormalities in this age group, including a pathogenic NT thickening. Genetic counseling led to an abortion to prevent congenital anomalies. This demonstrated CNV-seq’s superior accuracy in identifying chromosomal microdeletions and microduplications.
Conclusions
CNV-seq technology is valuable for identifying fetuses with abnormal soft markers, guiding its future use in perinatal diagnosis and aiding clinical genetic counseling.
Funding source: Health Commission of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region
Award Identifier / Grant number: Z-K20241742
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Professor Chao Ou, Clinical Laboratory of Guangxi Medical University Cancer Hospital, for his assistance in this study.
-
Research ethics: Approval for the study was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the hospital (number: YLSFYLLKY2023-10-24-01). The principles of the Declaration of Helsinki were followed at every stage of the study.
-
Informed consent: Informed consent was obtained from all individuals included in this study.
-
Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.The first draft of the manuscript was written by Guangting Lu.Guangting Lu collected and analyzed the data and was a major contributor in writing the manuscript. Weiwu Liu oversaw the work and revised the manuscript.
-
Use of Large Language Models, AI and Machine Learning Tools: None declared.
-
Conflict of interest: The authors state no conflict of interest.
-
Research funding: This study was supported by the self-funded project of Health Commission of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region. The project contract number is Z-K20241742.
-
Data availability: Not applicable.
Karyotype results of 43 chromosome abnormality detected by CNV-seq.
No | Ultrasound soft index | Results of karyotype analysis | CNV-seq test results | CNV results interpretation | Pregnancy outcomes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
A213204 | Fetal nasal bone not shown, NT2.7 mm | 47,Xn,+21 | 47,Xn,+21 | Pathogenicity | Induced labour |
A220182 | NT thickening and fetal nasal bone not shown | 47,Xn,+21 | 47,Xn,+21 | Pathogenicity | Induced labour |
A220212 | NT thickening, fetal nasal bone not shown | 47,Xn,+21 | 47,Xn,+21 | Pathogenicity | Induced labour |
A220226 | Bilateral lateral ventricles were dilated, about 11 mm left and right, and single umbilical artery | 47,Xn,+21 | 47,Xn,+21 | Pathogenicity | Induced labour |
A220698 | The strong echo of the fetal nasal bone is indistinct | 47,Xn,+21 | 47,Xn,+21 | Pathogenicity | Induced labour |
A221009 | NT thickening | 47,Xn,1qh+,+21 | 47,Xn,+21 | Pathogenicity | Induced labour |
A221264 | Fetal nasal bone not shown | 47,Xn,+21 | 47,Xn,+21 | Pathogenicity | Induced labour |
A221317 | Fetal nasal bone not shown, bilateral ventricular dilatation | 47,Xn,+21 | 47,Xn,+21 | Pathogenicity | Induced labour |
A221371 | Nt3.1 mm, nasal bone not shown | 47,Xn,+21 | 47,Xn,+21 | Pathogenicity | Induced labour |
A222241 | Bilateral CPC, nasal bone not shown, NT cut-off value | 47,Xn,+21 | 47,Xn,+21 | Pathogenicity | Induced labour |
A222353 | Fetal nasal bone not shown | 47,Xn,+21 | 47,Xn,+21 | Pathogenicity | Induced labour |
A222490 | The fetal NT was thickened by 4.9 mm, and the strong echo of the fetal nasal bone was not clear | 47,Xn,+21 | 47,Xn,+21 | Pathogenicity | Induced labour |
A222841 | NT thickening | 47,Xn,+21 | 47,Xn,+21 | Pathogenicity | Induced labour |
A222901 | NT 4.7 mm, single umbilical artery, right CPC | 47,XN,+18 | 47,XN,+18 | Pathogenicity | Induced labour |
A212826 | NT thickened by 3.4 mm | 45,X | 45,X | Pathogenicity | Induced labour |
A221322 | NT3.4 mm | 47,XYY[51]/46,XY[49] | 47,XYY | Pathogenicity | Natural and live births |
A220691 | The echo of fetal intestine was enhanced | No abnormalities were observed | 47, XYY/46, XY. The sample was a Y chromosome repeat chimera (copy number: 1.16) with a fragment size of 59.37 Mb | Pathogenicity | Natural and live births |
A220927 | NT thickening | No abnormalities were observed | The chromosome 15 q11.2 is missing 0.34 mb. | Pathogenicity | Induced labour |
A221822 | NT3.2 mm | No abnormalities were observed | The chromosome 16 p11.2 is missing 0.56 mb. | Pathogenicity | Induced labour |
A222045 | NT2.7 mm | No abnormalities were observed | Repeat 2.50 MB at chromosome 22 q11.21. | Pathogenicity | Induced labour |
A222193 | Vagus subclavian artery | No abnormalities were observed | The chromosome 15 q11.2 is missing 0.36 mb. | Pathogenicity | Natural and live births |
A221588 | The fetal pyeles were distended and separated | No abnormalities were observed | Repeat 2.44 MB at chromosome 22 q11.21 | May cause illness | Natural and live births |
A212255 | NT2.8 mm | No abnormalities were observed | Repeat 1.46 MB at chromosome 2 p13.1-p12 | Meaning unclear | Natural and live births |
A212395 | The foetal posterior fossa cistern widened | 46,Xn,13pss | Repeat 5.00 MB at chromosome 13 q11-q12.12 | Meaning unclear | Induced labour |
A213299 | NT:2.7 mm | No abnormalities were observed | Repeat 0.78 MB at chromosome 8 p22 | Meaning unclear | Natural and live births |
C21344 | The echo of fetal intestine was enhanced | No abnormalities were observed | Repeat chromosome 140.92 MB at Q22.1 | Meaning unclear | Natural and live births |
C22129 | The echo of fetal intestine was enhanced | No abnormalities were observed | 0.58 MB is missing on chromosome 6 q14.2 | Meaning unclear | Natural and live births |
A220026 | Fetal nasal bone not shown | No abnormalities were observed | Repeat 1.12 MB at chromosome 14 q11.2 | Meaning unclear | Natural and live births |
A221495 | The echo of fetal intestine was enhanced | No abnormalities were observed | Repeat 1.04 MB at chromosome 3 p26.3 | Meaning unclear | Live birth by Caesarean section |
A221594 | NT thickening | No abnormalities were observed | Repeat 0.96 MB at Q35.2 chromosome 4 | Meaning unclear | Natural and live births |
A221624 | NT3.6 mm | No abnormalities were observed | Repeat 4.92 MB at chromosome 14 q22.2-q23.1 | Meaning unclear | Live birth by Caesarean section |
A222183 | Dilatation of the right renal pelvis | No abnormalities were observed | Repeat 1.18 MB at chromosome 8 q23.3 | Meaning unclear | Live birth by Caesarean section |
A222229 | The echo of fetal intestine was enhanced | No abnormalities were observed | Repeat 1.00 MB at chromosome 5 q23.1 | Meaning unclear | Natural and live births |
A222351 | Fetal nasal bone not shown | No abnormalities were observed | 1.20 mb missing on chromosome 8 q23.3 | Meaning unclear | Natural and live births |
A222865 | NT thickening | No abnormalities were observed | Repeat 2.34 MB at chromosome 2 p22.2-p22.1 | Meaning unclear | Natural and live births |
A212919 | NT:2.7 mm | No abnormalities were observed | Repeat 0.50 MB at chromosome 15 q13.3 | Probably benign | Live birth by Caesarean section |
C22063 | Dilatation of the fetal lateral ventricle | No abnormalities were observed | 0.44 MB is missing in chromosome 7 q31.1 | Probably benign | Natural and live births |
A220868 | Fetal NT thickening, nasal bone not shown | No abnormalities were observed | Repeat 0.80 Mb at chromosome 8 p23.2 | Probably benign | Live birth by Caesarean section |
C21277 | Lateral ventricles slightly dilated | No abnormalities were observed | 0.50 MB missing in chromosome 14 q11.2 | Benign | Live birth by Caesarean section |
C21317 | Posterior fossa cistern widened | 46, x, inv (y)(p11q11), Y chromosome polymorphism | 0.40 mb missing in chromosome 14 q11.2 | Benign | Live birth by Caesarean section |
C22004 | Dilatation of lateral ventricle | No abnormalities were observed | 0.30 mb missing in chromosome 4 q11.2 | Benign | Live birth by Caesarean section |
C22037 | The echo of fetal intestine was enhanced | No abnormalities were observed | There was a deletion of 0.50 MB at Q11.2 and a repeat of 0.32 MB at chromosome 22 q11.23-q12.1 | Benign | Live birth by Caesarean section |
C22056 | Bright spot of fetal ventricle | No abnormalities were observed | 0.42 mb missing in chromosome 14 q11.2 | Benign | Live birth by Caesarean section |
-
Xn, chromosome xx or xy; NT, nuchal translucency; CNV, copy number variation; Inv, inversion.

Whole genome of 22q11.21 microrepeat chromosome (Table A1, case A222045).

45, complete genome map of X Turner syndrome (Table A1, case A212826).

Full genome of trisomy 21-syndrome (Table A1, case A21009).
References
1. Shaw, SWS, Chen, C-P, Cheng, P-J. From down syndrome screening to noninvasive prenatal testing: 20 years’ experience in Taiwan. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 2013;52:470–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tjog.2013.10.003.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
2. Choi, H, Lau, TK, Jiang, FM, Chan, MK, Zhang, HY, Lo, PSS, et al.. Fetal aneuploidy screening by maternal plasma DNA sequencing: ‘False positive’ due to confined placental mosaicism. Prenat Diagn 2012;33:198–200. https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.4024.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
3. Torella, M, Tormettino, B, Zurzolo, V, Labriola, D, Ambrosio, D, Stradella, L, et al.. Screening for trisomy 21 by maternal age fetal nuchal translucency thickness and maternal serum sample. Minerva Ginecol 2013;65:653–9.Suche in Google Scholar
4. Brumfield, CG, Wenstrom, KD, Owen, J, Davis, RO. Ultrasound findings and multiple marker screening in trisomy 18. Obstet Gynecol 2000;95:51–4. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006250-200001000-00011.Suche in Google Scholar
5. Wang, J-C, Ross, L, Mahon, LW, Owen, R, Hemmat, M, Wang, BT, et al.. Regions of homozygosity identified by oligonucleotide SNP arrays: evaluating the incidence and clinical utility. Eur J Hum Genet 2015;23:663–71. https://doi.org/10.1038/ejhg.2014.153.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
6. Hurd, PJ, Nelson, CJ. Advantages of next-generation sequencing versus the microarray in epigenetic research. Briefings Funct Genom Proteom 2009;8:174–83. https://doi.org/10.1093/bfgp/elp013.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
7. Clinical Genetics Group of Medical Genetics Branch Chinese Medical Association, Professional Committee for Prenatal Diagnosis of Genetic Diseases Medical Genetics Branch of Chinese Medical Association, Group of Genetic Disease Prevention, Control Birth Defect Prevention, Control Committee of Chinese Society of Preventive Medicine. Expert consensus on the application of low-depth whole genome sequencing in prenatal diagnosis. Zhonghua Yi Xue Yi Chuan Xue Za Zhi 2019;36:293–6.Suche in Google Scholar
8. García-Acero, M, Suárez-Obando, F, Gómez-Gutiérrez, A. CGH analysis in Colombian patients: findings of 1374 arrays in a seven-year study. Mol Cytogenet 2018;11:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13039-018-0398-9.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
9. Wang, J, Chen, L, Zhou, C, Wang, L, Xie, H, Xiao, Y, et al.. Prospective chromosome analysis of 3429 amniocentesis samples in China using copy number variation sequencing. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2018;219:287.e1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2018.05.030.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
10. Lan, L, She, L, Zhang, B, He, Y, Zheng, Z. Prenatal diagnosis of 913 fetuses samples using copy number variation sequencing. J Gene Med 2021;23:e3324. https://doi.org/10.1002/jgm.3324.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
11. Wang, J, Chen, L, Zhou, C, Wang, L, Xie, H, Xiao, Y, et al.. Identification of copy number variations among fetuses with ultrasound soft markers using next-generation sequencing. Sci Rep 2018;8:8134. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-26555-6.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
12. Roozbeh, N, Azizi, M, Darvish, L. Pregnancy outcome of abnormal nuchal translucency: a systematic review. J Clin Diagn Res 2017;11:QC12–6. https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2017/23755.9384.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
13. Souka, AP, von Kaisenberg, CS, Hyett, JA, Sonek, JD, Nicolaides, KH. Increased nuchal translucency with normal karyotype. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005;192:1005–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2004.12.093.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
14. Shakoor, S, Dileep, D, Tirmizi, S, Rashid, S, Amin, Y, Munim, S. Increased nuchal translucency and adverse pregnancy outcomes. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2016;30:1760–3. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2016.1224836.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
15. Leung, TY, Vogel, I, Lau, TK, Chong, W, Hyett, JA, Petersen, OB, et al.. Identification of submicroscopic chromosomal aberrations in fetuses with increased nuchal translucency and apparently normal karyotype. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011;38:314–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.8988.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
16. Scala, C, Familiari, A, Pinas, A, Papageorghiou, AT, Bhide, A, Thilaganathan, B, et al.. Perinatal and long‐term outcomes in fetuses diagnosed with isolated unilateral ventriculomegaly: systematic review and meta‐analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2017;49:450–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.15943.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
17. Pagani, G, Thilaganathan, B, Prefumo, F. Neurodevelopmental outcome in isolated mild fetal ventriculomegaly: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014;44:254–60. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.13364.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
18. Sethna, F, Tennant, PWG, Rankin, J, Robson, SC. Prevalence, natural history, and clinical outcome of mild to moderate ventriculomegaly. Obstet Gynecol 2011;117:867–76. https://doi.org/10.1097/aog.0b013e3182117471.Suche in Google Scholar
19. Cicero, S, Longo, D, Rembouskos, G, Sacchini, C, Nicolaides, KH. Absent nasal bone at 11–14 weeks of gestation and chromosomal defects. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2003;22:31–5. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.170.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
20. Findley, R, Allen, VM, Brock, J-AK. Adverse perinatal conditions associated with prenatally detected fetal echogenic bowel in Nova Scotia. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2018;40:555–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogc.2017.09.017.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
21. De Oronzo, MA. Hyperechogenic fetal bowel: an ultrasonographic marker for adverse fetal and neonatal outcome? J Prenat Med 2011;5:9–13.Suche in Google Scholar
22. Ronin, C, Mace, P, Stenard, F, Loundou, A, Capelle, M, Mortier, I, et al.. Antenatal prognostic factor of fetal echogenic bowel. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2017;212:166–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.01.060.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
23. Sullivan, A, Giudice, T, Vavelidis, F, Thiagarajah, S. Choroid plexus cysts: is biochemical testing a valuable adjunct to targeted ultrasonography? Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999;181:260–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9378(99)70545-4.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
24. Kupferminc, MJ, Tamura, RK, Sabbagha, RE, Parilla, BV, Cohen, LS, Pergament, E. Isolated choroid plexus cyst(s): an indication for amniocentesis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994;171:1068–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9378(94)90037-x.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
25. Cheng, P-J, Shaw, S-W, Soong, Y-K. Association of fetal choroid plexus cysts with trisomy 18 in a population previously screened by nuchal translucency thickness measurement. J Soc Gynecol Investig 2006;13:280–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsgi.2006.02.013.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
26. Lu, J-W, Lin, L, Xiao, L-P, Li, P, Shen, Y, Zhang, X-L, et al.. Prognosis of 591 fetuses with ultrasonic soft markers during mid-term pregnancy. Curr Med Sci 2017;37:948–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11596-017-1833-6.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
27. Markus‐Bustani, K, Yaron, Y, Goldstein, M, Orr‐Urtreger, A, Ben‐Shachar, S. Undetected sex chromosome aneuploidy by chromosomal microarray. Prenat Diagn 2012;32:1117–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.3979.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
28. Wang, H, Chau, MHK, Cao, Y, Kwok, KY, Choy, KW. Chromosome copy number variants in fetuses with syndromic malformations. Birth Defects Res 2017;109:725–33. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdr2.1054.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
29. Wou, K, Levy, B, Wapner, RJ. Chromosomal microarrays for the prenatal detection of microdeletions and microduplications. Clin Lab Med 2016;36:261–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cll.2016.01.017.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
30. Wilch, ES, Morton, CC. Historical and clinical perspectives on chromosomal translocations. In: Zhang, Y, editor. Advances in experimental medicine and biology. Singapore: Springer; 2018:1–14 pp.10.1007/978-981-13-0593-1_1Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
31. Kaser, D. The status of genetic screening in recurrent pregnancy loss. Obstet Gynecol Clin N Am 2018;45:143–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ogc.2017.10.007.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
32. Zhang, X, Chen, L, Wang, X, Wang, X, Jia, M, Ni, S, et al.. Changes in maternal age and prevalence of congenital anomalies during the enactment of China’s universal two-child policy (2013-2017) in Zhejiang Province, China: an observational study. PLoS Med 2020;17:e1003047. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003047.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
33. Hu, Z-M, Li, L-L, Zhang, H, Zhang, H-G, Liu, R-Z, Yu, Y. Clinical application of chromosomal microarray analysis in pregnant women with advanced maternal age and fetuses with ultrasonographic soft markers. Med Sci Monit 2021;27:e929074. https://doi.org/10.12659/msm.929074.Suche in Google Scholar
© 2025 the author(s), published by De Gruyter, Berlin/Boston
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Reviews
- AI and early diagnostics: mapping fetal facial expressions through development, evolution, and 4D ultrasound
- Investigation of cardiac remodeling and cardiac function on fetuses conceived via artificial reproductive technologies: a review
- Commentary
- A crisis in U.S. maternal healthcare: lessons from Europe for the U.S.
- Opinion Paper
- Selective termination: a life-saving procedure for complicated monochorionic gestations
- Original Articles – Obstetrics
- Exploring the safety and diagnostic utility of amniocentesis after 24 weeks of gestation: a retrospective analysis
- Maternal and neonatal short-term outcome after vaginal breech delivery >36 weeks of gestation with and without MRI-based pelvimetric measurements: a Hannover retrospective cohort study
- Antepartum multidisciplinary approach improves postpartum pain scores in patients with opioid use disorder
- Determinants of pregnancy outcomes in early-onset intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy
- Copy number variation sequencing detection technology for identifying fetuses with abnormal soft indicators: a comprehensive study
- Benefits of yoga in pregnancy: a randomised controlled clinical trial
- Atraumatic forceps-guided insertion of the cervical pessary: a new technique to prevent preterm birth in women with asymptomatic cervical shortening
- Original Articles – Fetus
- Impact of screening for large-for-gestational-age fetuses on maternal and neonatal outcomes: a prospective observational study
- Impact of high maternal body mass index on fetal cerebral cortical and cerebellar volumes
- Adrenal gland size in fetuses with congenital heart disease
- Aberrant right subclavian artery: the importance of distinguishing between isolated and non-isolated cases in prenatal diagnosis and clinical management
- Short Communication
- Trends and variations in admissions for cannabis use disorder among pregnant women in United States
- Letter to the Editor
- Trisomy 18 mosaicism – are we able to predict postnatal outcome by analysing the tissue-specific distribution?
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Reviews
- AI and early diagnostics: mapping fetal facial expressions through development, evolution, and 4D ultrasound
- Investigation of cardiac remodeling and cardiac function on fetuses conceived via artificial reproductive technologies: a review
- Commentary
- A crisis in U.S. maternal healthcare: lessons from Europe for the U.S.
- Opinion Paper
- Selective termination: a life-saving procedure for complicated monochorionic gestations
- Original Articles – Obstetrics
- Exploring the safety and diagnostic utility of amniocentesis after 24 weeks of gestation: a retrospective analysis
- Maternal and neonatal short-term outcome after vaginal breech delivery >36 weeks of gestation with and without MRI-based pelvimetric measurements: a Hannover retrospective cohort study
- Antepartum multidisciplinary approach improves postpartum pain scores in patients with opioid use disorder
- Determinants of pregnancy outcomes in early-onset intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy
- Copy number variation sequencing detection technology for identifying fetuses with abnormal soft indicators: a comprehensive study
- Benefits of yoga in pregnancy: a randomised controlled clinical trial
- Atraumatic forceps-guided insertion of the cervical pessary: a new technique to prevent preterm birth in women with asymptomatic cervical shortening
- Original Articles – Fetus
- Impact of screening for large-for-gestational-age fetuses on maternal and neonatal outcomes: a prospective observational study
- Impact of high maternal body mass index on fetal cerebral cortical and cerebellar volumes
- Adrenal gland size in fetuses with congenital heart disease
- Aberrant right subclavian artery: the importance of distinguishing between isolated and non-isolated cases in prenatal diagnosis and clinical management
- Short Communication
- Trends and variations in admissions for cannabis use disorder among pregnant women in United States
- Letter to the Editor
- Trisomy 18 mosaicism – are we able to predict postnatal outcome by analysing the tissue-specific distribution?