Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: To compare the six-sequence-tagged site (STS) with the eight-STS scheme in the detection of Y chromosome microdeletions.
METHODS: Using real-time quantitative PCR, we compared the results of the six-STS (sY84, sY86, sY127, sY134, sY254, sY255) scheme with those of the eight-STS (sY84, sY86, sY127, sY134, sY254, sY255, sY145, sY152) scheme in detecting Y chromosome microdeletions.
RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found in the detection rate of the deletion of the azoospermia factor (AZF) regions between the six-STS and eight-STS methods (9.34% ［575/6177］ vs 8.85% ［542/6122］, P > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Though the eight-STS scheme increased the detection of AZFd, its detection rate of the AZF region deletion was not significantly different from that of the six-STS method. From the perspectives of experimental operation, economic cost and clinical strategy guidance, the six-STS is better than the eight-STS scheme for the detection of Y chromosome microdeletions.
METHODS: Using real-time quantitative PCR, we compared the results of the six-STS (sY84, sY86, sY127, sY134, sY254, sY255) scheme with those of the eight-STS (sY84, sY86, sY127, sY134, sY254, sY255, sY145, sY152) scheme in detecting Y chromosome microdeletions.
RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found in the detection rate of the deletion of the azoospermia factor (AZF) regions between the six-STS and eight-STS methods (9.34% ［575/6177］ vs 8.85% ［542/6122］, P > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Though the eight-STS scheme increased the detection of AZFd, its detection rate of the AZF region deletion was not significantly different from that of the six-STS method. From the perspectives of experimental operation, economic cost and clinical strategy guidance, the six-STS is better than the eight-STS scheme for the detection of Y chromosome microdeletions.
摘要：
目的：比较六序列标记位点（STS）与八STS方案在Y染色体微缺失检测中的作用。
方法：使用实时定量PCR，我们比较了6-STS（sY84，sY86，sY127，sY134，sY254，sY255）方案与8-STS（sY84，sY86，sY127，sY134，sY254，sY255，sY145，sY152）方案检测Y染色体微缺失的结果。
结果：六-STS和八-STS方法对无精子症因子（AZF）区域缺失的检出率差异无统计学意义（9.34％［575/6177］vs8.85％［542/6122］，P>0.05)。
结论：尽管八STS方案增加了AZFd的检测，其对AZF区缺失的检出率与六-STS方法无显著差异。从实验操作的角度来看，经济成本和临床策略指导，在检测Y染色体微缺失方面，6-STS方案优于8-STS方案。
方法：使用实时定量PCR，我们比较了6-STS（sY84，sY86，sY127，sY134，sY254，sY255）方案与8-STS（sY84，sY86，sY127，sY134，sY254，sY255，sY145，sY152）方案检测Y染色体微缺失的结果。
结果：六-STS和八-STS方法对无精子症因子（AZF）区域缺失的检出率差异无统计学意义（9.34％［575/6177］vs8.85％［542/6122］，P>0.05)。
结论：尽管八STS方案增加了AZFd的检测，其对AZF区缺失的检出率与六-STS方法无显著差异。从实验操作的角度来看，经济成本和临床策略指导，在检测Y染色体微缺失方面，6-STS方案优于8-STS方案。
