分子时代的胎儿和新生儿尸检:探索成功检测的组织选择。

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 PATHOLOGY Pediatric and Developmental Pathology Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2023-12-14 DOI:10.1177/10935266231214880
Elizabeth S Doughty, Miriam D Post
{"title":"分子时代的胎儿和新生儿尸检:探索成功检测的组织选择。","authors":"Elizabeth S Doughty, Miriam D Post","doi":"10.1177/10935266231214880","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>While conventional autopsy is the gold-standard for determining cause of demise in the fetal and neonatal population, molecular analysis is increasingly used as an ancillary tool. Testing methods and tissue selection should be optimized to provide informative genetic results. This institutional review compares testing modalities and postmortem tissue type in 53 demises occurring between 20 weeks of gestation and 28 days of life. Testing success, defined as completion of analysis, varies by technique and may require viable cells for culture or extractable nucleic acid. Success was achieved by microarray in 29/30 tests (96.7%), karyotype in 40/54 tests (74.1%), fluorescent in situ hybridization in 5/9 tests (55.6%), and focused gene panels in 2/2 tests (100%). With respect to tissue type, postmortem prepartum amniotic fluid was analyzed to completion in 100% of tests performed; compared to 84.0%, 54.5%, and 80.8% of tests using placenta, fetal only, and mixed fetal-placental tissue collection, respectively. Sampling skin (83.3%, in cases with minimal maceration) and kidney (75.0%) were often successful, compared to lower efficacy of umbilical cord (57.1%) and liver (25.0%). Addition of genetic testing into cases with anomalous clinical and gross findings can increase the utility of the final report for family counseling and future pregnancy planning.</p>","PeriodicalId":54634,"journal":{"name":"Pediatric and Developmental Pathology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fetal and Neonatal Autopsy in the Molecular Age: Exploring Tissue Selection for Testing Success.\",\"authors\":\"Elizabeth S Doughty, Miriam D Post\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10935266231214880\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>While conventional autopsy is the gold-standard for determining cause of demise in the fetal and neonatal population, molecular analysis is increasingly used as an ancillary tool. Testing methods and tissue selection should be optimized to provide informative genetic results. This institutional review compares testing modalities and postmortem tissue type in 53 demises occurring between 20 weeks of gestation and 28 days of life. Testing success, defined as completion of analysis, varies by technique and may require viable cells for culture or extractable nucleic acid. Success was achieved by microarray in 29/30 tests (96.7%), karyotype in 40/54 tests (74.1%), fluorescent in situ hybridization in 5/9 tests (55.6%), and focused gene panels in 2/2 tests (100%). With respect to tissue type, postmortem prepartum amniotic fluid was analyzed to completion in 100% of tests performed; compared to 84.0%, 54.5%, and 80.8% of tests using placenta, fetal only, and mixed fetal-placental tissue collection, respectively. Sampling skin (83.3%, in cases with minimal maceration) and kidney (75.0%) were often successful, compared to lower efficacy of umbilical cord (57.1%) and liver (25.0%). Addition of genetic testing into cases with anomalous clinical and gross findings can increase the utility of the final report for family counseling and future pregnancy planning.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54634,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pediatric and Developmental Pathology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pediatric and Developmental Pathology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10935266231214880\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/12/14 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pediatric and Developmental Pathology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10935266231214880","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

虽然传统尸检是确定胎儿和新生儿死亡原因的黄金标准,但分子分析正越来越多地被用作辅助工具。应优化检测方法和组织选择,以提供有参考价值的遗传结果。本机构综述比较了 53 例妊娠 20 周至出生 28 天死亡病例的检测方法和死后组织类型。检测成功(即完成分析)因技术而异,可能需要有活力的细胞进行培养或提取核酸。微阵列检测成功率为 29/30 次(96.7%),核型检测成功率为 40/54 次(74.1%),荧光原位杂交检测成功率为 5/9 次(55.6%),重点基因检测成功率为 2/2 次(100%)。在组织类型方面,100%的检测完成了对死前羊水的分析;而使用胎盘、仅胎儿组织和胎儿-胎盘混合组织采集的检测分别完成了 84.0%、54.5% 和 80.8%。皮肤取样(83.3%,在浸渍极少的病例中)和肾脏取样(75.0%)通常都很成功,相比之下,脐带取样(57.1%)和肝脏取样(25.0%)的成功率较低。在临床和大体检查结果异常的病例中加入基因检测,可提高最终报告在家庭咨询和未来怀孕计划中的实用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Fetal and Neonatal Autopsy in the Molecular Age: Exploring Tissue Selection for Testing Success.

While conventional autopsy is the gold-standard for determining cause of demise in the fetal and neonatal population, molecular analysis is increasingly used as an ancillary tool. Testing methods and tissue selection should be optimized to provide informative genetic results. This institutional review compares testing modalities and postmortem tissue type in 53 demises occurring between 20 weeks of gestation and 28 days of life. Testing success, defined as completion of analysis, varies by technique and may require viable cells for culture or extractable nucleic acid. Success was achieved by microarray in 29/30 tests (96.7%), karyotype in 40/54 tests (74.1%), fluorescent in situ hybridization in 5/9 tests (55.6%), and focused gene panels in 2/2 tests (100%). With respect to tissue type, postmortem prepartum amniotic fluid was analyzed to completion in 100% of tests performed; compared to 84.0%, 54.5%, and 80.8% of tests using placenta, fetal only, and mixed fetal-placental tissue collection, respectively. Sampling skin (83.3%, in cases with minimal maceration) and kidney (75.0%) were often successful, compared to lower efficacy of umbilical cord (57.1%) and liver (25.0%). Addition of genetic testing into cases with anomalous clinical and gross findings can increase the utility of the final report for family counseling and future pregnancy planning.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
5.30%
发文量
59
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal covers the spectrum of disorders of early development (including embryology, placentology, and teratology), gestational and perinatal diseases, and all diseases of childhood. Studies may be in any field of experimental, anatomic, or clinical pathology, including molecular pathology. Case reports are published only if they provide new insights into disease mechanisms or new information.
期刊最新文献
CD163 Expression in Chronic Intervillositis of Unknown Etiology and SARS-CoV-2 Placentitis. Cord Hemangioma Versus Angiomyxoma: How Many Angels Can Dance on the Head of a Pin? Hereditary Multiple Intestinal Atresia With a Novel TTC7A Pathogenic Variant: Gastrointestinal Manifestations in Two Cases. Comparison of Clinical Diagnosis and Autopsy Findings of Early Neonatal Deaths: Diagnostic Challenges and the Value of Autopsy in Identifying Rare Pathologies. Maude Abbott: "A Feminine Misfit in an Exclusive Male Environment" and Her Strategies for Success.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1