Eintrag weiter verarbeiten
Rapid karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: A comparative study of the ‘pipette method’ and the ‘in situ’ technique for chromosome harvesting
Gespeichert in:
| Zeitschriftentitel: | Prenatal Diagnosis |
|---|---|
| Personen und Körperschaften: | , , , |
| In: | Prenatal Diagnosis, 13, 1993, 12, S. 1085-1093 |
| Format: | E-Article |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| veröffentlicht: |
Wiley
|
| Schlagwörter: |
| author_facet |
Claussen, Uwe Ulmer, Renate Beinder, Ernst Voigt, Hans‐Joachim Claussen, Uwe Ulmer, Renate Beinder, Ernst Voigt, Hans‐Joachim |
|---|---|
| author |
Claussen, Uwe Ulmer, Renate Beinder, Ernst Voigt, Hans‐Joachim |
| spellingShingle |
Claussen, Uwe Ulmer, Renate Beinder, Ernst Voigt, Hans‐Joachim Prenatal Diagnosis Rapid karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: A comparative study of the ‘pipette method’ and the ‘in situ’ technique for chromosome harvesting Genetics (clinical) Obstetrics and Gynecology |
| author_sort |
claussen, uwe |
| spelling |
Claussen, Uwe Ulmer, Renate Beinder, Ernst Voigt, Hans‐Joachim 0197-3851 1097-0223 Wiley Genetics (clinical) Obstetrics and Gynecology http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pd.1970131203 <jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>Rapid karyotyping in the second and third trimesters has important implications for the management of pregnancies at risk. From September 1985 to March 1992, 735 amniotic fluid samples sent to our laboratory for rapid karyotyping from 64 different diagnostic centres of the Federal Republic of Germany were included in a comparative study on harvesting for chromosome analysis using the ‘pipette method’ or the ‘<jats:italic>in situ</jats:italic>’ technique. The average time between preparation of the amniotic fluid and verbal notification of the analysed karyotype was 5·41 days. The ‘pipette method’ needed on average 4·65 days, and the ‘<jats:italic>in situ</jats:italic>’ technique 5·97 days. In comparison with other more invasive techniques available for rapid karyotyping such as cordocentesis and placental biopsy, amniocentesis and subsequent chromosome harvesting using the ‘pipette method’ and/or the ‘<jats:italic>in situ</jats:italic>’ technique proved very useful and efficient. The overall incidence of chromosome aberrations was 15·3 per cent. The high rate of structural chromosome aberrations and uncommon aneuploidies found in our investigation (12 per cent) indicates that for rapid karyotyping in the second and third trimesters, conventional cytogenetic techniques cannot be replaced by faster techniques based on fluorescent <jats:italic>in situ</jats:italic> hybridization on interphase cells in the near future.</jats:p> Rapid karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: A comparative study of the ‘pipette method’ and the ‘<i>in situ</i>’ technique for chromosome harvesting Prenatal Diagnosis |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1002/pd.1970131203 |
| facet_avail |
Online |
| format |
ElectronicArticle |
| fullrecord |
blob:ai-49-aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMTAwMi9wZC4xOTcwMTMxMjAz |
| id |
ai-49-aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMTAwMi9wZC4xOTcwMTMxMjAz |
| institution |
DE-D275 DE-Bn3 DE-Brt1 DE-D161 DE-Gla1 DE-Zi4 DE-15 DE-Pl11 DE-Rs1 DE-105 DE-14 DE-Ch1 DE-L229 |
| imprint |
Wiley, 1993 |
| imprint_str_mv |
Wiley, 1993 |
| issn |
0197-3851 1097-0223 |
| issn_str_mv |
0197-3851 1097-0223 |
| language |
English |
| mega_collection |
Wiley (CrossRef) |
| match_str |
claussen1993rapidkaryotypinginprenataldiagnosisacomparativestudyofthepipettemethodandtheinsitutechniqueforchromosomeharvesting |
| publishDateSort |
1993 |
| publisher |
Wiley |
| recordtype |
ai |
| record_format |
ai |
| series |
Prenatal Diagnosis |
| source_id |
49 |
| title |
Rapid karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: A comparative study of the ‘pipette method’ and the ‘in situ’ technique for chromosome harvesting |
| title_unstemmed |
Rapid karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: A comparative study of the ‘pipette method’ and the ‘in situ’ technique for chromosome harvesting |
| title_full |
Rapid karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: A comparative study of the ‘pipette method’ and the ‘in situ’ technique for chromosome harvesting |
| title_fullStr |
Rapid karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: A comparative study of the ‘pipette method’ and the ‘in situ’ technique for chromosome harvesting |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Rapid karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: A comparative study of the ‘pipette method’ and the ‘in situ’ technique for chromosome harvesting |
| title_short |
Rapid karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: A comparative study of the ‘pipette method’ and the ‘in situ’ technique for chromosome harvesting |
| title_sort |
rapid karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: a comparative study of the ‘pipette method’ and the ‘<i>in situ</i>’ technique for chromosome harvesting |
| topic |
Genetics (clinical) Obstetrics and Gynecology |
| url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pd.1970131203 |
| publishDate |
1993 |
| physical |
1085-1093 |
| description |
<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>Rapid karyotyping in the second and third trimesters has important implications for the management of pregnancies at risk. From September 1985 to March 1992, 735 amniotic fluid samples sent to our laboratory for rapid karyotyping from 64 different diagnostic centres of the Federal Republic of Germany were included in a comparative study on harvesting for chromosome analysis using the ‘pipette method’ or the ‘<jats:italic>in situ</jats:italic>’ technique. The average time between preparation of the amniotic fluid and verbal notification of the analysed karyotype was 5·41 days. The ‘pipette method’ needed on average 4·65 days, and the ‘<jats:italic>in situ</jats:italic>’ technique 5·97 days. In comparison with other more invasive techniques available for rapid karyotyping such as cordocentesis and placental biopsy, amniocentesis and subsequent chromosome harvesting using the ‘pipette method’ and/or the ‘<jats:italic>in situ</jats:italic>’ technique proved very useful and efficient. The overall incidence of chromosome aberrations was 15·3 per cent. The high rate of structural chromosome aberrations and uncommon aneuploidies found in our investigation (12 per cent) indicates that for rapid karyotyping in the second and third trimesters, conventional cytogenetic techniques cannot be replaced by faster techniques based on fluorescent <jats:italic>in situ</jats:italic> hybridization on interphase cells in the near future.</jats:p> |
| container_issue |
12 |
| container_start_page |
1085 |
| container_title |
Prenatal Diagnosis |
| container_volume |
13 |
| format_de105 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_de14 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_de15 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_de520 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_de540 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_dech1 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_ded117 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_degla1 |
E-Article |
| format_del152 |
Buch |
| format_del189 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_dezi4 |
Article |
| format_dezwi2 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_finc |
Article, E-Article |
| format_nrw |
Article, E-Article |
| _version_ |
1792336642623668235 |
| geogr_code |
not assigned |
| last_indexed |
2024-03-01T15:03:32.428Z |
| geogr_code_person |
not assigned |
| openURL |
url_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fvufind.svn.sourceforge.net%3Agenerator&rft.title=Rapid+karyotyping+in+prenatal+diagnosis%3A+A+comparative+study+of+the+%E2%80%98pipette+method%E2%80%99+and+the+%E2%80%98in+situ%E2%80%99+technique+for+chromosome+harvesting&rft.date=1993-12-01&genre=article&issn=1097-0223&volume=13&issue=12&spage=1085&epage=1093&pages=1085-1093&jtitle=Prenatal+Diagnosis&atitle=Rapid+karyotyping+in+prenatal+diagnosis%3A+A+comparative+study+of+the+%E2%80%98pipette+method%E2%80%99+and+the+%E2%80%98%3Ci%3Ein+situ%3C%2Fi%3E%E2%80%99+technique+for+chromosome+harvesting&aulast=Voigt&aufirst=Hans%E2%80%90Joachim&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1002%2Fpd.1970131203&rft.language%5B0%5D=eng |
| SOLR | |
| _version_ | 1792336642623668235 |
| author | Claussen, Uwe, Ulmer, Renate, Beinder, Ernst, Voigt, Hans‐Joachim |
| author_facet | Claussen, Uwe, Ulmer, Renate, Beinder, Ernst, Voigt, Hans‐Joachim, Claussen, Uwe, Ulmer, Renate, Beinder, Ernst, Voigt, Hans‐Joachim |
| author_sort | claussen, uwe |
| container_issue | 12 |
| container_start_page | 1085 |
| container_title | Prenatal Diagnosis |
| container_volume | 13 |
| description | <jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>Rapid karyotyping in the second and third trimesters has important implications for the management of pregnancies at risk. From September 1985 to March 1992, 735 amniotic fluid samples sent to our laboratory for rapid karyotyping from 64 different diagnostic centres of the Federal Republic of Germany were included in a comparative study on harvesting for chromosome analysis using the ‘pipette method’ or the ‘<jats:italic>in situ</jats:italic>’ technique. The average time between preparation of the amniotic fluid and verbal notification of the analysed karyotype was 5·41 days. The ‘pipette method’ needed on average 4·65 days, and the ‘<jats:italic>in situ</jats:italic>’ technique 5·97 days. In comparison with other more invasive techniques available for rapid karyotyping such as cordocentesis and placental biopsy, amniocentesis and subsequent chromosome harvesting using the ‘pipette method’ and/or the ‘<jats:italic>in situ</jats:italic>’ technique proved very useful and efficient. The overall incidence of chromosome aberrations was 15·3 per cent. The high rate of structural chromosome aberrations and uncommon aneuploidies found in our investigation (12 per cent) indicates that for rapid karyotyping in the second and third trimesters, conventional cytogenetic techniques cannot be replaced by faster techniques based on fluorescent <jats:italic>in situ</jats:italic> hybridization on interphase cells in the near future.</jats:p> |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1002/pd.1970131203 |
| facet_avail | Online |
| format | ElectronicArticle |
| format_de105 | Article, E-Article |
| format_de14 | Article, E-Article |
| format_de15 | Article, E-Article |
| format_de520 | Article, E-Article |
| format_de540 | Article, E-Article |
| format_dech1 | Article, E-Article |
| format_ded117 | Article, E-Article |
| format_degla1 | E-Article |
| format_del152 | Buch |
| format_del189 | Article, E-Article |
| format_dezi4 | Article |
| format_dezwi2 | Article, E-Article |
| format_finc | Article, E-Article |
| format_nrw | Article, E-Article |
| geogr_code | not assigned |
| geogr_code_person | not assigned |
| id | ai-49-aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMTAwMi9wZC4xOTcwMTMxMjAz |
| imprint | Wiley, 1993 |
| imprint_str_mv | Wiley, 1993 |
| institution | DE-D275, DE-Bn3, DE-Brt1, DE-D161, DE-Gla1, DE-Zi4, DE-15, DE-Pl11, DE-Rs1, DE-105, DE-14, DE-Ch1, DE-L229 |
| issn | 0197-3851, 1097-0223 |
| issn_str_mv | 0197-3851, 1097-0223 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-01T15:03:32.428Z |
| match_str | claussen1993rapidkaryotypinginprenataldiagnosisacomparativestudyofthepipettemethodandtheinsitutechniqueforchromosomeharvesting |
| mega_collection | Wiley (CrossRef) |
| physical | 1085-1093 |
| publishDate | 1993 |
| publishDateSort | 1993 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | ai |
| recordtype | ai |
| series | Prenatal Diagnosis |
| source_id | 49 |
| spelling | Claussen, Uwe Ulmer, Renate Beinder, Ernst Voigt, Hans‐Joachim 0197-3851 1097-0223 Wiley Genetics (clinical) Obstetrics and Gynecology http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pd.1970131203 <jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>Rapid karyotyping in the second and third trimesters has important implications for the management of pregnancies at risk. From September 1985 to March 1992, 735 amniotic fluid samples sent to our laboratory for rapid karyotyping from 64 different diagnostic centres of the Federal Republic of Germany were included in a comparative study on harvesting for chromosome analysis using the ‘pipette method’ or the ‘<jats:italic>in situ</jats:italic>’ technique. The average time between preparation of the amniotic fluid and verbal notification of the analysed karyotype was 5·41 days. The ‘pipette method’ needed on average 4·65 days, and the ‘<jats:italic>in situ</jats:italic>’ technique 5·97 days. In comparison with other more invasive techniques available for rapid karyotyping such as cordocentesis and placental biopsy, amniocentesis and subsequent chromosome harvesting using the ‘pipette method’ and/or the ‘<jats:italic>in situ</jats:italic>’ technique proved very useful and efficient. The overall incidence of chromosome aberrations was 15·3 per cent. The high rate of structural chromosome aberrations and uncommon aneuploidies found in our investigation (12 per cent) indicates that for rapid karyotyping in the second and third trimesters, conventional cytogenetic techniques cannot be replaced by faster techniques based on fluorescent <jats:italic>in situ</jats:italic> hybridization on interphase cells in the near future.</jats:p> Rapid karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: A comparative study of the ‘pipette method’ and the ‘<i>in situ</i>’ technique for chromosome harvesting Prenatal Diagnosis |
| spellingShingle | Claussen, Uwe, Ulmer, Renate, Beinder, Ernst, Voigt, Hans‐Joachim, Prenatal Diagnosis, Rapid karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: A comparative study of the ‘pipette method’ and the ‘in situ’ technique for chromosome harvesting, Genetics (clinical), Obstetrics and Gynecology |
| title | Rapid karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: A comparative study of the ‘pipette method’ and the ‘in situ’ technique for chromosome harvesting |
| title_full | Rapid karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: A comparative study of the ‘pipette method’ and the ‘in situ’ technique for chromosome harvesting |
| title_fullStr | Rapid karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: A comparative study of the ‘pipette method’ and the ‘in situ’ technique for chromosome harvesting |
| title_full_unstemmed | Rapid karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: A comparative study of the ‘pipette method’ and the ‘in situ’ technique for chromosome harvesting |
| title_short | Rapid karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: A comparative study of the ‘pipette method’ and the ‘in situ’ technique for chromosome harvesting |
| title_sort | rapid karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: a comparative study of the ‘pipette method’ and the ‘<i>in situ</i>’ technique for chromosome harvesting |
| title_unstemmed | Rapid karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis: A comparative study of the ‘pipette method’ and the ‘in situ’ technique for chromosome harvesting |
| topic | Genetics (clinical), Obstetrics and Gynecology |
| url | http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pd.1970131203 |