Discover Community Create You

Loading publication...

Noodle always counts identifier-free feature events for service operation. With your permission, Google Analytics can also estimate audience and engagement. Search text, publication identifiers, cookies, IP addresses and browser fingerprints are never included in Noodle's first-party event counters.

Privacy details

Article

Noninvasive prenatal testing as compared to chorionic villus sampling is more sensitive for the detection of confined placental mosaicism involving the cytotrophoblast

13 Jun 2020

Abstract excerpt

Little is known about the sensitivity of NIPT for detection of CPM. Brison et al (2018) found evidence that NIPT is more sensitive for the detection of placental mosaicism due to the observation of a higher proportion of mosaicism for the common aneuploidies with NIPT as compared to conventional karyotyping.1 In contrast, Benn et al2 showed a significantly lower sensitivity for the detection of rare autosomal...

Read the complete abstract on PubMed

Topics

Share this publication in a Topic to start or enrich a Post.

Share to Genetic Syndromes and Imprinting
Share to Gestational Trophoblastic Disease Studies
Share to Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics

Methodology Data sources Editorial policy Privacy About Contact Helena Bioinformatics

Source

Identifiers

PMID: 32533714
DOI: 10.1002/pd.5766

Provenance

PubMed metadata and Literature Corpus relationships. Corpus snapshot updated 7 Sept 2026.

Related research

Semantic proximity does not establish scientific evidence.

Research trail→

Click a neighbor to travelStep 1 · 12 closest

Noninvasive prenatal testing as compared to chorionic villus sampling is more sensitive for the detection of confined placental mosaicism involving the cytotrophoblastPMID 32533714Read ↗

Confined placental mosaicism and its impact on confirmation of NIPT resultsSemantic proximity Read ↗

Non-Invasive Prenatal Screening from a Genetic Counseling Prospective: Pre and Post-Genetic Counseling Regarding Rare Chromosomal Abnormalities and Incidental FindingSemantic proximity Read ↗

Confined placental mosaicism: Distribution of chromosomally abnormal cells over the term placentaSemantic proximity Read ↗

Implications of fetoplacental mosaicism on cell‐free <scp>DNA</scp> testing: a review of a common biological phenomenonSemantic proximity Read ↗

Genome‐wide non‐invasive prenatal screening for all cytogenetically visible imbalancesSemantic proximity Read ↗

Rare autosomal trisomies on non‐invasive prenatal testing: not as adverse as expectedSemantic proximity Read ↗

Pitfalls of prenatal diagnosis associated with mosaicismSemantic proximity Read ↗

Combined first‐trimester screening and invasive diagnostics for atypical chromosomal aberrations: Danish nationwide study of prenatal profiles and detection compared with NIPTSemantic proximity Read ↗

Predicting fetoplacental mosaicism during cfDNA-based NIPTSemantic proximity Read ↗

Noninvasive Prenatal Testing - When Is It Advantageous to ApplySemantic proximity Read ↗

False Negative NIPT Results: Risk Figures for Chromosomes 13, 18 and 21 Based on Chorionic Villi Results in 5967 Cases and Literature ReviewSemantic proximity Read ↗

Placental, maternal, fetal, and technical origins of false-positive cell-free DNA screening resultsSemantic proximity Read ↗

⌁Select a neighboring publication to make it the new centre.