Fluorescent In Situ Hybridisation (FISH) as a Followup Test for Postnatal Microarray Results
Research Square
2023
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
Background: Fluorescent in situ Hybridisation (FISH) is a valuable option for follow-up or confirmatory testing especially if aberrations have been missed or require further testing for interpretation after array comparative genomic hybridisation (aCGH). In this study, the Vysis IntelliFISH Hybridization Buffer (Abbott Molecular Inc.) hybridisation protocol was successfully validated with improved turn-around-time and the utility of FISH as a follow-up test for patients referred for aCGH testing was evaluated. Results: The results for nine of 11 selected cases correlated with the aCGH findings. Of these, six were for 22q11.2 deletion syndrome, two for Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome and one for Prader-Willi/Angelman syndrome. In addition, two cases were negative on aCGH but were positive for Pallister-Killian syndrome on FISH, confirming the clinical diagnosis. Conclusion: Offering FISH as a follow-up test to aCGH is beneficial in specific circumstances i.e., in tissue-specific mosaicism as illustrated by the PKS cases, or for family cascade testing of a confirmed microdeletion or microduplication. Genetics laboratories should consider implementing FISH studies as a follow-up test for post-natal microarray results.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know