388 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22034057)
1. Introducing array comparative genomic hybridization into routine prenatal diagnosis practice: a prospective study on over 1000 consecutive clinical cases.
Fiorentino F; Caiazzo F; Napolitano S; Spizzichino L; Bono S; Sessa M; Nuccitelli A; Biricik A; Gordon A; Rizzo G; Baldi M
Prenat Diagn; 2011 Dec; 31(13):1270-82. PubMed ID: 22034057
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal mosaicism in over 1600 cases using array comparative genomic hybridization as a first line test.
Carey L; Scott F; Murphy K; Mansfield N; Barahona P; Leigh D; Robertson R; McLennan A
Prenat Diagn; 2014 May; 34(5):478-86. PubMed ID: 24453008
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Diagnostic utility of array-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) in a prenatal setting.
Maya I; Davidov B; Gershovitz L; Zalzstein Y; Taub E; Coppinger J; Shaffer LG; Shohat M
Prenat Diagn; 2010 Dec; 30(12-13):1131-7. PubMed ID: 20925131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Prenatal diagnosis: array comparative genomic hybridization in fetuses with abnormal sonographic findings.
Vestergaard EM; Christensen R; Petersen OB; Vogel I
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2013 Jul; 92(7):762-8. PubMed ID: 23590624
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Clinical validity of karyotyping for the diagnosis of chromosomal imbalance following array comparative genomic hybridisation.
Gekas J; Vallée M; Castonguay L; Laframboise R; Maranda B; Piedboeuf B; Rousseau F
J Med Genet; 2011 Dec; 48(12):851-5. PubMed ID: 21965346
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. aCGH on chorionic villi mirrors the complexity of fetoplacental mosaicism in prenatal diagnosis.
Filges I; Kang A; Klug V; Wenzel F; Heinimann K; Tercanli S; Miny P
Prenat Diagn; 2011 May; 31(5):473-8. PubMed ID: 21351283
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Pallister-Killian syndrome: Cytogenetics and molecular investigations of mosaic tetrasomy 12p in prenatal chorionic villus and in amniocytes. Strategy of prenatal diagnosis.
Libotte F; Bizzoco D; Gabrielli I; Mesoraca A; Cignini P; Vitale SG; Marilli I; Gulino FA; Rapisarda AM; Giorlandino C
Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Dec; 55(6):863-866. PubMed ID: 28040135
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Prenatal diagnosis using combined quantitative fluorescent polymerase chain reaction and array comparative genomic hybridization analysis as a first-line test: results from over 1000 consecutive cases.
Scott F; Murphy K; Carey L; Greville W; Mansfield N; Barahona P; Robertson R; McLennan A
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2013 May; 41(5):500-7. PubMed ID: 23401365
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Clinical use of array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) for prenatal diagnosis in 300 cases.
Van den Veyver IB; Patel A; Shaw CA; Pursley AN; Kang SH; Simovich MJ; Ward PA; Darilek S; Johnson A; Neill SE; Bi W; White LD; Eng CM; Lupski JR; Cheung SW; Beaudet AL
Prenat Diagn; 2009 Jan; 29(1):29-39. PubMed ID: 19012303
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Applications of array comparative genomic hybridization in obstetrics.
Fruhman G; Van den Veyver IB
Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am; 2010 Mar; 37(1):71-85, Table of Contents. PubMed ID: 20494259
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Genomic medicine in prenatal diagnosis.
South ST; Chen Z; Brothman AR
Clin Obstet Gynecol; 2008 Mar; 51(1):62-73. PubMed ID: 18303500
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Prenatal chromosomal microarray analysis in a diagnostic laboratory; experience with >1000 cases and review of the literature.
Breman A; Pursley AN; Hixson P; Bi W; Ward P; Bacino CA; Shaw C; Lupski JR; Beaudet A; Patel A; Cheung SW; Van den Veyver I
Prenat Diagn; 2012 Apr; 32(4):351-61. PubMed ID: 22467166
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Evaluation of array comparative genomic hybridization for genetic analysis of chorionic villus sampling from pregnancy loss in comparison to karyotyping and multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification.
Deshpande M; Harper J; Holloway M; Palmer R; Wang R
Genet Test Mol Biomarkers; 2010 Jun; 14(3):421-4. PubMed ID: 20408732
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Uncovering recurrent microdeletion syndromes and subtelomeric deletions/duplications through non-selective application of a MLPA-based extended prenatal panel in routine prenatal diagnosis.
Konialis C; Hagnefelt B; Sevastidou S; Karapanou S; Pispili K; Markaki A; Pangalos C
Prenat Diagn; 2011 Jun; 31(6):571-7. PubMed ID: 21448863
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Routine use of array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) as standard approach for prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal abnormalities. Clinical experience of 1763 prenatal cases.
Papoulidis I; Sotiriadis A; Siomou E; Papageorgiou E; Eleftheriades M; Papadopoulos V; Oikonomidou E; Orru S; Manolakos E; Athanasiadis A
Prenat Diagn; 2015 Dec; 35(13):1269-77. PubMed ID: 26289927
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [The application and significance in prenatal diagnosis using G-banding, fluorescence in situ hybridization and comparative genomic hybridization].
Zhang WS; Chen QN; Wu XH; Liang QH
Zhonghua Yi Xue Yi Chuan Xue Za Zhi; 2009 Apr; 26(2):156-60. PubMed ID: 19350506
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Dilemmas in Prenatal Chromosomal Diagnosis Revealed Through a Single Center's 30 Years' Experience and 90,000 Cases.
Konialis C; Pangalos C
Fetal Diagn Ther; 2015; 38(3):218-32. PubMed ID: 25659342
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Dual testing with QF-PCR and karyotype analysis for prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal abnormalities. Evaluation of 13,500 cases with consideration of using QF-PCR as a stand-alone test according to referral indications.
Papoulidis I; Siomou E; Sotiriadis A; Efstathiou G; Psara A; Sevastopoulou E; Anastasakis E; Sifakis S; Tsiligianni T; Kontodiou M; Malamaki C; Tzimina M; Petersen MB; Manolakos E; Athanasiadis A
Prenat Diagn; 2012 Jul; 32(7):680-5. PubMed ID: 22513450
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Prenatal diagnosis and molecular cytogenetic characterization of mosaicism for a small supernumerary marker chromosome derived from ring chromosome 4.
Chen CP; Chen M; Su YN; Tsai FJ; Chern SR; Wu PC; Chen WL; Chen LF; Pan CW; Wang W
Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol; 2011 Jun; 50(2):188-95. PubMed ID: 21791306
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Whole-genome microarray analysis in prenatal specimens identifies clinically significant chromosome alterations without increase in results of unclear significance compared to targeted microarray.
Coppinger J; Alliman S; Lamb AN; Torchia BS; Bejjani BA; Shaffer LG
Prenat Diagn; 2009 Dec; 29(12):1156-66. PubMed ID: 19795450
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
