Human Genetics

, Volume 92, Issue 4, pp 353–358 | Cite as

Detection of confined placental mosaicism in trisomy 18 conceptions using interphase cytogenetic analysis

  • Karen J. Harrison
  • Irene J. Barrett
  • Brenda L. Lomax
  • Brian D. Kuchinka
  • Dagmar K. Kalousek
Original Investigations


Fluorescence in situ hybridization provides a rapid and accurate technique for detecting chromosomal aneuploidy. It is an excellent method for identifying mosaicism in placental tissues following prenatal diagnosis. Mosaicism, in the form of confined placental mosaicism, occurs im approximately 1%–2% of viable pregnancies studied by chorionic villus sampling at 9–11 weeks of gestation. It has been detected in pregnancies with both diploid and trisomic fetuses and appears to have an important effect on the intrauterine fetal survival. Using both standard cytogenetic analysis and fluorescence in situ hybridization, we have studied 12 placentas from pregnancies with trisomy 18 for the presence of chromosomal mosaicism. These included 2 that were spontaneously aborted, 5 that were terminated after prenatal diagnosis, and 4 that were delivered as either stillborn or liveborn. Significant levels of mosaicism, confined exclusively to cytotrophoblast, were detected in 7 pregnancies. This study demonstrates the usefulness of interphase cytogenetic analysis of uncultured tissues as an alternative method for the detection of mosaicism.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bajalica S, Bui T-H, Koch J, et al (1992) Prenatal investigation of a 45,X/46,X(r?) karyotype in amniocytes using fluorescence in situ hybridization with an X-centromeric probe. Prenat Diagn 12:61–64Google Scholar
  2. Binkert F, Savoldelli G, Hungentobler W, et al (1989) Chorionic villus sampling (placenta biopsy) in the second and third trimester: cytogenetic results in 111 cases. In: Antsaklis A, Metaxotou C (eds) Chorionic villus sampling and early prenatal diagnosis. BETA Medical Arts, Athens, pp 138–141Google Scholar
  3. Breed ASPM, Mantingh A, Vosters R, Beekhus JR, Van Lith JMM, Anders GJPA (1991) Follow-up and pregnancy outcome after a diagnosis of mosaicism in CVS. Prenat Diagn 11:577–580Google Scholar
  4. Cartier L, Vekemans M, Hamilton E (1988) Occurrence and interpretation of discordance in cytogenetic analysis of chorionic villi. Am J Hum Genet 43 [Suppl]:A255Google Scholar
  5. Christensen B, Bryndorf T, Philip J, Lundsteen C, Hansen W (1991) Rapid prenatal diagnosis of trisomy 18 and triploidy in interphase nuclei of uncultured amniocytes by nonradioactive in situ hybridization. Prenat Diagn 12:241–250Google Scholar
  6. Cox DM, Niewczas-Late V, Riffel MI, Hamerton JL (1974) Chromosome mosaicism in diagnostic amniotic fluid cell cultures. Pediatr Res 8:679–683Google Scholar
  7. Hahn GJ, Meeker WQ (1991) Statistical intervals: a guide for practitioners. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Heim S, Kristoffersson U, Mandahl N, Mineur A, Mitelman F, Edvall H, Gustavii B (1985) Chromosome analysis in 100 cases of first trimester trophoblast sampling. Clin Genet 27:451–457Google Scholar
  9. Herrington CS, McGee JO'D (1990) Interphase cytogenetics. Neurochem Res 15:467–474Google Scholar
  10. Jacobs P, Hassold T (1987) Chromosome abnormalities: origin and etiology in abortions and livebirths. In: Vogel F, Sperling K (eds) Human genetics. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Johnson A, Wapner RJ, Davis GH, Jackson LG (1990) Mosaicism in chorionic villus sampling: an association with poor perinatal outcome. Obstet Gynecol 75:573–577Google Scholar
  12. Kalousek DK, Barrett U, McGillivray BC (1989) Placental mosaicism and intrauterine survival of trisomics 13 and 18. Am J Hum Genet 44:338–343Google Scholar
  13. Kalousek DK, Howard-Peebles PN, Olson SB, Barrett IJ, Dorfmann A, Black SH, Schulman JD, Wilson RD (1991) Confirmation of CVS mosaicism in term placentae and high frequency of intrauterine growth retardation association with confined placental mosaicism. Prenat Diagn 11:743–750Google Scholar
  14. Kalousek DK, Langlois S, Barrett IJ, Yam I, Wilson DR, Howard-Peebles PN, Johnson MP, Giorgiutti E (1993) Uniparental disomy for chromosome 16 in humans. Hum Genet 52:8–16Google Scholar
  15. Klever M, Grond-Ginsbach CJ, Hager H-D, Schroeder-Kurth TM (1992) Chorionic villus metaphase chromosomes and interphase nuclei analyzed by chromosomal in situ hybridization. Prenat Diagn 12:53–59Google Scholar
  16. Klinger K, Landes G, Shook D, Harvey R, Lopez L, Locke P, Lerner T, Osathanondh R, Leverone B, Houseal T, Pavelka K, Dackowski W (1992) Rapid detection of chromosome aneuploidy in uncultured amniocytes by using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Am J Hum Genet 51:55–65Google Scholar
  17. Kuo W-L, Tenjin H, Segraves R, Pinkel D, Golbus MS, Gray J (1992) Detection of aneuploidy involving chromosomes 13, 18,or 21, by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) to interphase and metaphase amniocytes. Am J Hum Genet 49:112–119Google Scholar
  18. Ledbetter DH, Zachary JM, Simpson JL, Golbus MS, Pergament E, Jackson L, Mahoney MJ, Desnick RJ, Schulman J, Copeland KL, Verlinsky Y, Yang-Feng T, Schonberg SA, Babu A, Tharapel A, Dorfmann A, Lubs HA, Rhoads GG, Fowler E, De la Cruz F (1992) Cytogenetic results from the US collaborative study on CVS. Prenat Diagn 12:317–345Google Scholar
  19. Martin AO, Elias S, Rosinsky B, Bombard AT, Simpson JL (1986) False negative finding on chorionic villus sampling. Lancet II:391–392Google Scholar
  20. Miny P, Hammer P, Gerlach B, Tercanli S, Horst J, Holzgreve W, Eiben B (1991) Mosaicism and accuracy of prenatal cytogenetic diagnosis after chorionic villus sampling and placental biopsies. Prenat Diagn 11:581–589Google Scholar
  21. Pinkel D, Landegent J, Collins C, Fuscoe J, Segraves R, Lucas J, Gray J (1988) Fluorescence in situ hybridization with human chromosome-specific libraries: detection of trisomy 21 and translocations of chromosome 4. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 85:9138–9142Google Scholar
  22. Schwinger E, Seidl E, Klink F, Rehder H (1989) Chromosomal mosaicism of the placenta. A cause of developmental failure of the fetus. Prenat Diagn 9:639–647Google Scholar
  23. Simoni G, Brambatti B, Danesino C, Rossella F, Terzoli BL, Ferrari M, Fraccaro M (1983) Efficient direct chromosome analyses and enzyme determinations from chorionic villi samples in the first trimester of pregnancy. Hum Genet 63:239–257Google Scholar
  24. Simpson JL (1990) Incidence and timing of pregnancy losses: relevance to evaluating safety of early prenatal diagnosis. J Med Genet 35:165–173Google Scholar
  25. Teshima LE, Kalousek DK, Vekemans MJJ, Markovic V, Cox DM, Dalliare L, Gagne R, Lin CC, Ray M, Sergovich FR, Uchida IA, Wang H, Tomkins DJ (1992) Chromosome mosaicism in CVS and amniocentesis samples. Prenat Diagn 12:443–466Google Scholar
  26. Wenger SL, Boone LY, Steele MW (1990) Mosaicism in Pallister i(12p) syndrome. Am J Med Genet 35:523–525Google Scholar
  27. Wirtz A, Seidel H, Brusis E, Murken J (1988) Another false-nega-tive finding on placental sampling. Prenat Diagn 8:321Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Karen J. Harrison
    • 1
  • Irene J. Barrett
    • 3
  • Brenda L. Lomax
    • 3
  • Brian D. Kuchinka
    • 2
  • Dagmar K. Kalousek
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Research DivisionBritish Columbia's Children's HospitalVancouverCanada
  2. 2.Cytogenetics and EmbryopathologyBritish Columiba's Cildren's HospitalVancouverCanada
  3. 3.Department of PathologyUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations