Author/Authors :
Hajlaoui, Amani Department of Cytogenetic and Reproductive Biology - Farhat Hached University Hospital, Sousse, Tunisia , Slimani, Wafa Department of Cytogenetic and Reproductive Biology - Farhat Hached University Hospital, Sousse, Tunisia , Kammoun, Molka Department of Cytogenetic and Reproductive Biology - Farhat Hached University Hospital, Sousse, Tunisia , Sallem, Amira Department of Cytogenetic and Reproductive Biology - Farhat Hached University Hospital, Sousse, Tunisia , El Amri, Fathi Private pediatrician, Tunis, Tunisi , Chaieb, Anouar Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology - Farhat Hached University Hospital, Sousse, Tunisia , Bibi, Mohamed Department of Cytogenetic and Reproductive Biology - Farhat Hached University Hospital, Sousse, Tunisia , Saad, Ali Department of Cytogenetic and Reproductive Biology - Farhat Hached University Hospital, Sousse, Tunisia , Zerelli, Soumaya Mougou Department of Cytogenetic and Reproductive Biology - Farhat Hached University Hospital, Sousse, Tunisia
Abstract :
Background: The subtelomeric rearrangements are increasingly being investigated in cases of idiopathic intellectual
disabilities (ID) and congenital abnormalities (CA) but are also thought to be responsible for unexplained recurrent
miscarriage (RM). Such rearrangements can go unnoticed through conventional cytogenetic techniques and are undetectable
even with high-resolution molecular cytogenetic techniques such as array comparative genomic hybridization
(aCGH), especially when DNA of the stillbirth or families are not available. The aim of the study is to evaluate the rate
of subtelomeric rearrangements in patients with RM.
Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional study, fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH), based on ToTelVysion
telomeric probes, was undertaken for 21 clinically normal couples exhibiting a “normal” karyotype with at least two
abortions. Approximately 62% had RM with a history of stillbirth or CA/ID while the other 38% had only RM.
Results: FISH detected one cryptic rearrangement between chromosomes 3q and 4p in the female partner of a
couple (III:4) [46,XX,ish t(3;4)(q28-,p16+;p16-,q28+)(D3S4559+,D3S4560-,D4S3359+; D3S4560+, D4S3359-
,D4S2930+)] who presented a history of RM and family history of ID and CA. Analysis of the other family members
of the woman showed that her sisters (III:6 and III:11) and brother (III:8) were also carriers of the same subtelomeric
translocation t(3;4)(q28;p16).
Conclusion: We conclude that subtelomeric FISH should be undertaken in couples with RM especially those who not
only have abortions but also have had at least one child with ID and/or CA, or other clinically recognizable syndromes.
For balanced and cryptic anomalies, subtelomeric FISH still remains the most suitable and effective tool in characterising
such chromosomal rearrangements in RM couples.
Keywords :
Spontaneous Abortion , Translocation , Chromosomal Aberration , Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization , Intellectual Disability