Search

Objective: Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) investigates placental DNA and may detect confined placental mosaicism (CPM). The aim of this study was to confirm CPM in the term placenta in cases with abnormal NIPT but normal follow-up cytogenetic studies of fetus and mother. Additionally we examined the distribution of abnormal cells over the placenta. Methods: Four chorionic villus (CV) biopsies from four placental quadrants were requested in cases where CPM was assumed. Both cell lineages of the CV, cytotrophoblast (CTB) and mesenchymal core (MC), were analyzed separately with SNP array. Results: The chromosome aberration was confirmed in 67 % of the placentas. Three quarters of the CTB and MC biopsies from these mosaic placentas were uniformly normal (57 %) or abnormal (20 %), and a minority showed mosaicism. Among 16 cases of CPM where first trimester CV were examined as well, 11 had chromosomally normal results during pregnancy. Discussion: Cytogenetic investigations of term placental biopsies suspected to be affected with CPM did not reveal the chromosome aberration in one third of the placentas. This is caused by the patchy pattern in which chromosomally abnormal cells are distributed over the placenta with the majority of the biopsies being uniformly normal. Further CPM research, including its clinical impact, requires the analysis of more than four biopsies to get insight into the extent of the affected part. Moreover, a subset of CPM type 1 and 3 seems to be only detectable with NIPT and not with first trimester CVS.

Objective: Placental cytogenetic studies may reveal the origin of discordant noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT). We performed placental studies to elucidate discordances between NIPT showing a structural chromosome aberration and the fetus having a different chromosome aberration in three cases. Method: Diagnostic testing with genomic SNP microarray was performed in three cases with NIPT showing a duplication on 4q (case 1), a terminal deletion of 13q (case 2), and a terminal deletion of 15q (case 3). Placental studies involved SNP array analysis of cytotrophoblast and mesenchymal core of chorionic villi of four placental quadrants. Clinical follow-up was performed as well. Results: Amniotic fluid revealed a different structural chromosome aberration than predicted by NIPT: a terminal 2q deletion (case 1), a segmental uniparental isodisomy of 13q (case 2), and a terminal duplication of 15q and of 13q (case 3). Placental studies revealed the aberration detected with NIPT in the cytotrophoblast, whereas the fetal karyotype was confirmed in the placental mesenchymal core. Conclusion: Our study shows that targeted cytogenetic investigations for confirmation of NIPT showing a microscopically visible structural chromosome aberration should be avoided, since another aberration, even a submicroscopic one or one involving another chromosome, may be present in the fetus.