Recently, chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) has been implemented as a first-tier test in pregnancies with ultrasound anomalies. However, its application for pregnancies with abnormal maternal serum screening (AMSS) only is not widespread. This study evaluated the value of CMA compared to traditional karyotyping in pregnancies with increased risk following first- or second-trimester maternal serum screening. Data from 3973 pregnancies with referral for invasive prenatal testing following AMSS were obtained from April 2016 to May 2020. Routine karyotyping was performed and single nucleotide polymorphism array was recommended. The foetuses were categorized according to the indications as AMSS only (group A) and AMSS with ultrasound anomalies (group B). CMA was performed on 713 prenatal samples. The proportion of women opting for CMA testing in both groups increased over the years. The incremental yield of clinically significant findings for pregnancies with high risk of screening results was similar to that for the foetuses with ultrasound soft markers (P > 0.05), but significantly lower than that for the foetuses with structural anomalies (P < 0.05). The total frequencies of variants of unknown significance in groups A and B showed no significant difference (P > 0.05). CMA should be performed for pregnant women undergoing prenatal invasive testing due to AMSS, especially with high-risk results, regardless of ultrasound findings.

OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to determine the diagnostic value of prenatal chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) for fetuses with several indications of being at high risk for various conditions.
METHODS: This retrospective analysis included 1256 pregnancies that were prenatally evaluated due to high-risk indications using invasive CMA. The indications for invasive prenatal diagnosis mainly included ultrasound anomalies, high-risk for maternal serum screening (MSS), high-risk for non-invasive prenatal tests (NIPT), family history of genetic disorders or birth defects, and advanced maternal age (AMA). The rate of clinically significant genomic imbalances between the different groups was compared.
RESULTS: The overall prenatal diagnostic yield was 98 (7.8%) of 1256 pregnancies. Clinically significant genomic aberrations were identified in 2 (1.5%) of 132 patients with non-structural ultrasound anomalies, 36 (12.7%) of 283 with structural ultrasound anomalies, 2 (4.5%) of 44 at high-risk for MSS, 38 (26.6%) of 143 at high-risk for NIPT, 11 (3.8%) of 288 with a family history, and 7 (2.1%) of 328 with AMA. Submicroscopic findings were identified in 29 fetuses, 19 of whom showed structural ultrasound anomalies.
CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic yields of CMA for pregnancies with different indications greatly varied. CMA could serve as a first-tier test for structural anomalies, especially multiple anomalies, craniofacial dysplasia, urinary defects, and cardiac dysplasia. Our results have important implications for genetic counseling.