Search

Purpose: This is a retrospective comparative study. We aimed to analyze the results of karyotype and chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) of amniotic fluid across different gestational weeks and evaluate the clinical value in prenatal diagnosis, particularly in the late pregnancies.Samples from 580 pregnant women of 18–23 weeks of gestation (mid-gestation group) and 196 pregnant women of 24–32 weeks of gestation (late group) were performed both standard G-band karyotype analysis and CMA.Among the 580 pregnant women in the routine group, the most common indications were positive Down’s screening (213/580, 36.7%), followed by advanced maternal age (196/580, 33.8%); while fetal structural anomalies on ultrasonography were the top reason for amniocentesis in the late group (56/196, 28.6%). In the routine group, the total detection rate was 12.1% (70/580), of which 4.1% (24/580) were identified by karyotype analysis and 11.2% (65/580) by CMA. The total detection rate was 15.3% (30/196) in the late group, of which 5.1% (10/196) were detected by karyotype analysis, and 14.3% (28/196) by CMA.Karyotype analysis and CMA are complementary in detecting chromosomal abnormalities. Amniotic cavity puncture in the karyotype analysis in 18–23 weeks of gestation and 24–32 weeks of gestation is safe and effective, more obvious effect on the latter.Methods: This is a retrospective comparative study. We aimed to analyze the results of karyotype and chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) of amniotic fluid across different gestational weeks and evaluate the clinical value in prenatal diagnosis, particularly in the late pregnancies.Samples from 580 pregnant women of 18–23 weeks of gestation (mid-gestation group) and 196 pregnant women of 24–32 weeks of gestation (late group) were performed both standard G-band karyotype analysis and CMA.Among the 580 pregnant women in the routine group, the most common indications were positive Down’s screening (213/580, 36.7%), followed by advanced maternal age (196/580, 33.8%); while fetal structural anomalies on ultrasonography were the top reason for amniocentesis in the late group (56/196, 28.6%). In the routine group, the total detection rate was 12.1% (70/580), of which 4.1% (24/580) were identified by karyotype analysis and 11.2% (65/580) by CMA. The total detection rate was 15.3% (30/196) in the late group, of which 5.1% (10/196) were detected by karyotype analysis, and 14.3% (28/196) by CMA.Karyotype analysis and CMA are complementary in detecting chromosomal abnormalities. Amniotic cavity puncture in the karyotype analysis in 18–23 weeks of gestation and 24–32 weeks of gestation is safe and effective, more obvious effect on the latter.Results: This is a retrospective comparative study. We aimed to analyze the results of karyotype and chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) of amniotic fluid across different gestational weeks and evaluate the clinical value in prenatal diagnosis, particularly in the late pregnancies.Samples from 580 pregnant women of 18–23 weeks of gestation (mid-gestation group) and 196 pregnant women of 24–32 weeks of gestation (late group) were performed both standard G-band karyotype analysis and CMA.Among the 580 pregnant women in the routine group, the most common indications were positive Down’s screening (213/580, 36.7%), followed by advanced maternal age (196/580, 33.8%); while fetal structural anomalies on ultrasonography were the top reason for amniocentesis in the late group (56/196, 28.6%). In the routine group, the total detection rate was 12.1% (70/580), of which 4.1% (24/580) were identified by karyotype analysis and 11.2% (65/580) by CMA. The total detection rate was 15.3% (30/196) in the late group, of which 5.1% (10/196) were detected by karyotype analysis, and 14.3% (28/196) by CMA.Karyotype analysis and CMA are complementary in detecting chromosomal abnormalities. Amniotic cavity puncture in the karyotype analysis in 18–23 weeks of gestation and 24–32 weeks of gestation is safe and effective, more obvious effect on the latter.Conclusion: This is a retrospective comparative study. We aimed to analyze the results of karyotype and chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) of amniotic fluid across different gestational weeks and evaluate the clinical value in prenatal diagnosis, particularly in the late pregnancies.Samples from 580 pregnant women of 18–23 weeks of gestation (mid-gestation group) and 196 pregnant women of 24–32 weeks of gestation (late group) were performed both standard G-band karyotype analysis and CMA.Among the 580 pregnant women in the routine group, the most common indications were positive Down’s screening (213/580, 36.7%), followed by advanced maternal age (196/580, 33.8%); while fetal structural anomalies on ultrasonography were the top reason for amniocentesis in the late group (56/196, 28.6%). In the routine group, the total detection rate was 12.1% (70/580), of which 4.1% (24/580) were identified by karyotype analysis and 11.2% (65/580) by CMA. The total detection rate was 15.3% (30/196) in the late group, of which 5.1% (10/196) were detected by karyotype analysis, and 14.3% (28/196) by CMA.Karyotype analysis and CMA are complementary in detecting chromosomal abnormalities. Amniotic cavity puncture in the karyotype analysis in 18–23 weeks of gestation and 24–32 weeks of gestation is safe and effective, more obvious effect on the latter. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are three views of cognitive representation: the amodal, strong-embodiment, and weak-embodiment views of cognition. The present research provides support for the weak-embodiment view by demonstrating that two representational systems, one conceptual and one perceptual, underlie the cognitive processing of sensory experiences. We find that an initial sensory experience can exert two independent influences on judgments about a subsequent sensory experience. Specifically, we show that the conceptual representation of an initial sensory experience creates an expectation that biases judgments of the subsequent experience toward the initial experience (i.e., an assimilation bias), while the perceptual representation of an initial sensory experience creates a comparison standard that biases judgments of the subsequent experience away from the initial experience (i.e., a contrast bias). Documenting concurrent assimilation and contrast biases supports the claim of a dual representational system espoused by the weak-embodiment view. In so doing, we update the classic literature on context effects and contribute to the debate on representational systems in cognition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]