Objective The prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal mosaicism is fraught with uncertainty. Karyotyping, chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA), and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) are three commonly used techniques. In this study, we evaluated these techniques for the prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal mosaicism and its clinical outcome. Study Design A retrospective review of mosaicism was conducted in 18,369 pregnant women from January 2016 to November 2021. The subjects underwent amniocentesis to obtain amniotic fluid for G-band karyotyping with or without CMA/FISH. Cases diagnosed with chromosomal mosaicism were selected for further analysis. Results In total, 101 cases of chromosomal mosaicism were detected in 100 pregnant women (0.54%, 100/18,369). Four were lost during follow-up, 61 opted to terminate their pregnancy, and 35 gave birth to a healthy singleton or twins. Among these 35 cases, postnatal cytogenetic testing was performed on eight and two exhibited mosaicism; however, nothing abnormal was observed in the postnatal phenotype follow-up. Karyotyping identified 96 incidents of chromosomal mosaicism including 13 with level II mosaicism and 83 with level III mosaicism, FISH identified 37 cases of mosaicism, and CMA identified 17. The most common form of chromosomal mosaicism involved monosomy X, of which the mosaic fraction in cultured karyotyping appeared higher or comparable to uncultured FISH/CMA (p < 0.05). Discordant mosaic results were observed in 34 of 101 cases (33.7%), most of which resulted from the detection limit of different techniques and/or the dominant growth of a certain cell line. Conclusion Based on the postnatal follow-up results from the babies born, we obtained a more hopeful result for the prognosis of chromosomal mosaicism. Although karyotyping was the most sensitive method for detecting chromosomal mosaicism, artifacts and bias resulting from culture should be considered, particularly for sex chromosomal abnormalities involving X monosomy, in which the combination with uncultured FISH was necessary. Key Points

Introduction: Though embryonic chromosome abnormalities have been reported to be the most common cause of missed abortions, previous studies have mainly focused on embryonic chromosome abnormalities of missed abortions, with very few studies reporting that of non-missed abortion. Without chromosome studies of normal abortion samples, it is impossible to determine the risk factors of embryo chromosome abnormalities and missed abortion. This study aimed to investigate the maternal and embryonic chromosome characteristics of missed and non-missed abortion, to clarify the questions that how many missed abortions are caused by embryonic chromosomal abnormalities and what are their risk factors.Material and methods: This study was conducted on 131 women with missed or non-missed abortion from the Longitudinal Missed Abortion Study (LoMAS). Logistic regression analysis was used to identify the association between maternal covariates and embryonic chromosomal abnormalities and missed abortions. Data on the characteristics of women with abortions were collected.Results: The embryonic chromosome abnormality rate was only 3.9% in non-missed abortion embryos, while it was 64.8% in missed-abortion embryos. Assisted reproductive technology and prior missed abortions increased the risk of embryonic chromosome abnormalities by 1.637 (95% CI: 1.573, 4.346. p = 0.010) and 3.111 (95% CI: 1.809, 7.439. (p &lt; 0.001) times, respectively. In addition, as the age increased by 1 year, the risk of embryonic chromosome abnormality increased by 14.4% (OR: 1.144, 95% CI: 1.030, 1.272. p = 0.012). Moreover, advanced age may lead to different distributions of chromosomal abnormality types.Conclusion: Nearly two-thirds of missed abortions are caused by embryonic chromosomal abnormalities. Moreover, advanced age, assisted reproductive technology, and prior missed abortions increase the risk of embryonic chromosomal abnormalities.

No abstract