Sara Masihi; Elahe Shirazi; Farideh Moramezi; Najmieh Saadati; Mojgan Barati
Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript, Available Online from 14 November 2022
Abstract
AbstractPurpose: This study aimed to compare CGH array and karyotype for prenatal diagnosis in high-risk individuals in the first trimester screening.Materials and Methods: The present cross-sectional descriptive prospective study was performed on high-risk mothers screened in the first trimester of ...
Read More
AbstractPurpose: This study aimed to compare CGH array and karyotype for prenatal diagnosis in high-risk individuals in the first trimester screening.Materials and Methods: The present cross-sectional descriptive prospective study was performed on high-risk mothers screened in the first trimester of pregnancy. Individuals were allocated into two groups under karyotype and CGH array. Because this study is based on genetic testing data, it does not require a follow-up. Information on age, number of pregnancies, history of abortion, history of disease and screening results were collected and analyzed. Data analysis was done using SPSS Version 22 (IBM).Results: In total 247 cases were analyzed with 128 cases in the karyotype group and 119 cases in the CGH group. 116 samples (90.6%) in the karyotype group and 99 samples (83.2%) in the CGH group showed a normal karyotype. 4.2% (5 samples) and 7.9% (10 samples) of chromosomal abnormalities were trisomy in the CGH group and the karyotype group, respectively. CGH array analysis on chromosomal abnormalities identified copy number variation (CNV) in about 9.2% (11 samples) of cases. In terms of risk factors structural chromosomal, there was a statistically significant relationship in terms of history of disabled children in the family, maternal age, history of anomalies, screening of the first trimester of pregnancy, and increased NT (p<0.05).Conclusions: High-resolution arrays specifically prevented fetal malformations. Until now, normal prenatal chromosome analysis has been shown a relatively standard method but CGH may be helpful to specialists in diagnosing chromosomal abnormalities, especially in unknown chromosomal abnormalities.
Obstetrics and Gynecology
Yuni Nurwati; Hardinsyah Hardinsyah; Sri Anna Marliyati; Budi Iman Santoso; Dewi Anggraini
Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript, Available Online from 04 March 2024
Abstract
Abstract Background and Objective: Nowadays, a simple and reliable screening tool to identify the risk of low birth weight (LBW) infant remains limited, particularly in rural areas where advanced technology is not available. Hence, this study has developed a reliable tool to be simply used by midwives ...
Read More
Abstract Background and Objective: Nowadays, a simple and reliable screening tool to identify the risk of low birth weight (LBW) infant remains limited, particularly in rural areas where advanced technology is not available. Hence, this study has developed a reliable tool to be simply used by midwives and cadres in detecting risk of LBW. Methods: This study used an analytic quantitative study based on retrospective data of 165 eligible pregnant women collected from a public hospital in Ternate City (2018-2023). Body height, body weight, body mass index (BMI), mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC), nausea and vomiting, gestational age of ANC visit (AV) of the first trimester of pregnancy, as well as marital age, age, occupation, education, parity, and abortion history of pregnant women were used as research variables. Binary logistic regression was applied to develop the model. Results: Body weight, marital age, education, and AV are statistically significant as screening indicators for detecting the risk of LBW infant with Area Under Curve (AUC) is 79.6%.Conclusion: Therefore, the model can be developed as a basis for developing a simple and reliable screening tool in the first trimester to detect the risk of LBW infant that can be implemented by midwives and cadres in rural area
