Background A retrospective study was performed to evaluate the patterns of cytogenomic findings detected from a case series of products of conception (POC) in recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) over a 16-year period from 2007 to 2023.

Results This case series of RPL was divided into a single analysis (SA) group of 266 women and a consecutive analysis (CA) group of 225 women with two to three miscarriages analyzed. Of the 269 POC from the SA group and the 469 POC from the CA group, a spectrum of cytogenomic abnormalities of simple aneuploidies, compound aneuploidies, polyploidies, and structural rearrangements/pathogenic copy number variants (pCNVs) were detected in 109 (41%) and 160 cases (34%), five (2%) and 11 cases (2%), 35 (13%) and 36 cases (8%), and 10 (4%) and 19 cases (4%), respectively. Patterns with recurrent normal karyotypes, alternating normal and abnormal karyotypes, and recurrent abnormal karyotypes were detected in 74 (33%), 71 (32%), and 80 (35%) of consecutive miscarriages, respectively. Repeat aneuploidies of monosomy X and trisomy 16, triploidy, and tetraploidy were detected in nine women.

Conclusions A comparable spectrum of cytogenomic abnormalities was noted in the SA and CA groups of RPL. A skewed likelihood of 2/3 for recurrent normal and abnormal karyotypes and 1/3 for alternating normal and abnormal karyotypes in consecutive miscarriages was observed. Routine cytogenetic analysis should be performed for consecutive miscarriages. Further genomic sequencing to search for detrimental and embryonic lethal variants causing miscarriages and pathogenic variants inducing aneuploidies and polyploidies should be considered for RPL with recurrent normal and abnormal karyotypes.

This project was categorized as a chart review retrospective case study and deemed exempt from Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval and granted waiver of consent based on the policy of the Yale University IRB.

Data and materials are available from the corresponding author upon request.

P.L. organized this retrospective study and wrote the manuscript. A. D. A. compiled cases from the laboratory database. H.C., M.C., and G.W. performed CMA on POC specimens and reviewed cytogenomic results. J.W. and Y.-H.J. provided scientific insight and reviewed the manuscript.

Article published online:
29 March 2024

© 2024. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany