Comparison of Solomon technique with selective laser ablation for twin-twin transfusion syndrome: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the Solomon and selective techniques for fetoscopic laser ablation (FLA) for the treatment of twin-twin transfusion syndrome (TTTS) in monochorionic-diamniotic twin pregnancies. METHODS: This was a systematic review conducted in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Electronic searches were performed for relevant citations published from inception to September 2014. Selected studies included pregnancies undergoing FLA for TTTS that reported on recurrence of TTTS, occurrence of twin anemia-polycythemia sequence (TAPS) or survival. RESULTS: From 270 possible citations, three studies were included, two cohort studies and one randomized controlled trial (RCT), which directly compared the Solomon and selective techniques for FLA. The odds ratios (OR) of recurrent TTTS when using the Solomon vs the selective technique in the two cohort studies (n = 249) were 0.30 (95% CI, 0.00-4.46) and 0.45 (95% CI, 0.07-2.20). The RCT (n = 274) demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in risk of recurrent TTTS with the Solomon technique (OR, 0.21 (95% CI, 0.04-0.98); P = 0.03). The ORs for the development of TAPS following the Solomon and the selective techniques were 0.20 (95% CI, 0.00-2.46) and 0.61 (95% CI, 0.05-5.53) in the cohort studies and 0.16 (95% CI, 0.05-0.49) in the RCT, with statistically significant differences for the RCT only (P < 0.001). Observational evidence suggested overall better survival with the Solomon technique, which was statistically significant for survival of at least one twin. The RCT did not demonstrate a significant difference in survival between the two techniques, most probably owing to the small sample size and lack of power. CONCLUSION: This systematic review of observational, comparative cohort and RCT data suggests a trend towards a reduction in TAPS and recurrent TTTS and an increase in twin survival, with no increase in the occurrence of complications or adverse events, when using the Solomon compared to the selective technique for the treatment of TTTS. These findings need to be confirmed by an appropriately-powered RCT with long-term neurological follow-up.

How does altering the resolution of chromosomal microarray analysis in the prenatal setting affect the rates of pathological and uncertain findings?

OBJECTIVE: Chromosomal Microarray Analysis (CMA) has a higher detection rate of pathogenic chromosome abnormalities over conventional (G-band) karyotyping. The optimum resolution of CMA in the prenatal setting remains debatable. Our objective was to determine if an increased detection rate was obtained by performing differing resolution of CMA on the same fetal samples and whether this resulted in an increase in variants of uncertain clinical significance (VOUS). METHODS: Sixty-two fetal cases initially underwent a 1 Mb targeted BAC microarray within a clinical diagnostic setting in addition to conventional karyotyping. At the conclusion of pregnancy, a higher resolution 60 K oligonucleotide microarray was performed. RESULTS: The 1 Mb BAC analysis demonstrated a detection rate of pathogenic copy number variations (CNVs) in 4.1% (95% CI 2.1-7.6) of cases and a variation of unknown significance (VOUS) rate of 0.4% (95% CI 0.07-2.2) over conventional G-band karyotyping. The 60 K array had an additional pathogenic detection rate of 4.8% (95% CI 1.6-13.3) over the BAC array but also detected an additional 8% (95% CI 1.3-14.8) VOUS. CONCLUSION: As the CMA platform resolution increases detection rates increase but are associated with an increase in VOUS rates. Our findings support the need for further large scale studies to inform the national consensus on the resolution required and on reporting of VOUS in the antenatal setting.

Additional information from chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) over conventional karyotyping when diagnosing chromosomal abnormalities in miscarriage: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 50% of spontaneous miscarriages are associated with chromosome abnormalities. Identification of these karyotypic abnormalities helps to estimate recurrence risks in future pregnancies. Chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) is transforming clinical cytogenetic practice with its ability to examine the human genome at increasingly high resolution. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine whether CMA testing on the products of conception following miscarriage provides better diagnostic information compared with conventional karyotyping. SEARCH STRATEGY: MEDLINE (from 1996 to December 2012), EMBASE (from 1974 to December 2012), and CINAHL (from 1996 to December 2012) databases were searched electronically. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies were selected if CMA was used on products of conception following miscarriage, alongside conventional karyotyping. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Nine papers were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. All statistical analyses were performed using stata 11.0 (Stata Corp., College Station, TX, USA). MAIN RESULTS: There was agreement between CMA and karyotyping in 86.0% of cases (95% CI 77.0-96.0%). CMA detected 13% (95% CI 8.0-21.0) additional chromosome abnormalities over conventional full karyotyping. In addition, traditional, full karyotyping detected 3% (95% CI 1.0-10.0%) additional abnormalities over CMA. The incidence of a variant of unknown significance (VOUS) being detected was 2% (95% CI 1.0-10.0%). AUTHOR'S CONCLUSIONS: Compared with karyotyping, there appears to be an increased detection rate of chromosomal abnormalities when CMA is used to analyse the products of conception; however, some of these abnormalities are VOUS, and this information should be provided when counselling women following miscarriage and when taking consent for the analysis of miscarriage products by CMA.

Use of prenatal chromosomal microarray: prospective cohort study and systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) is utilized in prenatal diagnosis to detect chromosomal abnormalities not visible by conventional karyotyping. A prospective cohort of women undergoing fetal CMA and karyotyping following abnormal prenatal ultrasound findings is presented in the context of a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature describing detection rates by CMA and karyotyping. METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study of 243 women undergoing CMA alongside karyotyping when a structural abnormality was detected on prenatal ultrasound. A systematic review of the literature was also performed. MEDLINE (1970-Dec 2012), EMBASE (1980-Dec 2012) and CINAHL (1982-June 2012) databases were searched electronically. Selected studies included > 10 cases and prenatal CMA in addition to karyotyping. The search yielded 560 citations. Full papers were retrieved for 86, and 25 primary studies were included in the systematic review. RESULTS: Our cohort study found an excess detection rate of abnormalities by CMA of 4.1% over conventional karyotyping when the clinical indication for testing was an abnormal fetal ultrasound finding; this was lower than the detection rate of 10% (95% CI, 8-13%) by meta-analysis. The rate of detection for variants of unknown significance (VOUS) was 2.1% (95% CI, 1.3-3.3%) when the indication for CMA was an abnormal scan finding. The VOUS detection rate was lower (1.4%; 95% CI, 0.5-3.7%) when any indication for prenatal CMA was meta-analyzed. CONCLUSION: We present evidence for a higher detection rate by CMA than by karyotyping not just in the case of abnormal ultrasound findings but also in cases of other indications for invasive testing. It is likely that CMA will replace karyotyping in high-risk pregnancies.

Microarray comparative genomic hybridization in prenatal diagnosis: a review.

G-band chromosomal karyotyping of fetal cells obtained by invasive prenatal testing has been used since the 1960s to identify structural chromosomal anomalies. Prenatal testing is usually performed in response to parental request, increased risk of fetal chromosomal abnormality associated with advanced maternal age, a high-risk screening test and/or the presence of a congenital malformation identified by ultrasonography. The results of karyotyping may inform the long-term prognosis (e.g. aneuploidy being associated with a poor outcome or microscopic chromosomal anomalies predicting global neurodevelopmental morbidity). Relatively recent advances in microarray technology are now enabling high-resolution genome-wide evaluation for DNA copy number abnormalities (e.g. deletions or duplications). While such technological advances promise increased sensitivity and specificity they can also pose difficult challenges of interpretation and clinical management. This review aims to give interested clinicians without an extensive prior knowledge of microarray technology, an overview of its use in prenatal diagnosis, the literature to date, advantages, potential pitfalls and experience from our own tertiary center.

Additional information from array comparative genomic hybridization technology over conventional karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) is transforming clinical cytogenetics with its ability to interrogate the human genome at increasingly high resolution. The aim of this study was to determine whether array CGH testing in the prenatal population provides diagnostic information over conventional karyotyping. METHODS: MEDLINE (1970 to December 2009), EMBASE (1980 to December 2009) and CINAHL (1982 to December 2009) databases were searched electronically. Studies were selected if array CGH was used on prenatal samples or if array CGH was used on postnatal samples following termination of pregnancy for structural abnormalities that were detected on an ultrasound scan. Of the 135 potential articles, 10 were included in this systematic review and eight were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled rate of extra information detected by array CGH when the prenatal karyotype was normal was meta-analyzed using a random-effects model. The pooled rate of receiving an array CGH result of unknown significance was also meta-analyzed. RESULTS: Array CGH detected 3.6% (95% CI, 1.5-8.5) additional genomic imbalances when conventional karyo-typing was 'normal', regardless of referral indication. This increased to 5.2% (95% CI, 1.9-13.9) more than karyotyping when the referral indication was a structural malformation on ultrasound. CONCLUSIONS: There appears to be an increased detection rate of chromosomal imbalances, compared with conventional karyotyping, when array CGH techniques are employed in the prenatal population. However, some are copy number imbalances that are not clinically significant. This carries implications for prenatal counseling and maternal anxiety.

Single twin demise: consequence for survivors.

Multiple pregnancies, the majority of which are twins, are at substantially higher risk of fetal morbidity and mortality when compared with singleton pregnancies. Single fetal demise occurs in up to 6.2% of all twin pregnancies. It may cause considerable risk for the co-twin including increased risk of fetal loss, premature delivery, neurovascular injury and end-organ damage. In this review we seek to summarise the most contemporary literature on the aetiology of single twin demise, the pathophysiology of injury to the surviving twin and the evidence for current management strategies.