Journal of Reproduction & Infertility

Journal of Reproduction & Infertility

De novo Balanced Robertsonian Translocation rob(22;22)(q10;q10) in a Woman with Recurrent Pregnancy Loss: A Rare Case

Authors
Nawras Alhalabi 1
Walid Al-Achkar 2
Abdulsamad Wafa 2
Mazen Kenj 3
Marwan Alhalabi 4
1 Faculty of Medicine, Syrian Private University, Damascus, Syria
2 Department of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology, Human Genetics Division, Atomic Energy Commission of Syria, Damascus, Syria
3 Assisted Reproduction Unit, Orient Hospital, Damascus, Syria; Kenj Cytogenetics Laboratory, Damascus, Syria
4 Assisted Reproduction Unit, Orient Hospital, Damascus, Syria; Department of Reproductive Medicine, Genetics and Embryology, Faculty of Medicine of Damascus University, Damascus, Syria
Abstract
Background: Recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL), one of the most common complications of pregnancy, is responsible for significant emotional distress to the couple desiring to conceive. In almost 50% of the cases, the etiology remains unknown. The frequency of chromosomal structural rearrangements associated with a history of RPL in couples varies between 2% to 8%. Robertsonian translocations (ROBs) have an estimated incidence rate of 1/1000 births, making this type of rearrangement the most common structural chromosomal abnormalities seen in the general population. According to the literature, there are few RPL cases with rob (22; 22). Case Presentation: This case is a Syrian female offered to the Orient Hospital (Damascus, Syria), having RPL in the first trimester, no fetal malformations, and/or no neonatal death. She had a balanced chromosomal translocation involved the both short arms of chromosome 22. Banding cytogenetics, refined by array-proven multicolor banding (aMCB) revealed a rob (22; 22)(q10;q10). Her husband had a normal karyotype. Interestingly, chromosomal analysis was performed for her other family members and it revealed normal karyotype for all people, which indicates that translocation is of de novo origin. However, the couple did not have any living offspring after seven years of marriage. Conclusion: The present case was a case of RPL occurring due to rob (22;22). However, the rob(22;22)(q10;10) is the cause of recurrent abortions. Couples with the history of RPL should be suggested to do cytogenetic analysis in order to estimate whether they have chromosomal rearrangement. This diagnostic approach is of great significance to figure out what causes RPL.
Keywords
Assisted Reproductive Techniques
Recurrent Pregnancy Loss
Robertsonian translocations
Syria
  1. Roman E. Fetal loss rates and their relation to pregnancy order. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1984;38(1):29-35.
  2. Shamsi MB, Venkatesh S, Pathak D, Deka D, Dada R. Sperm DNA damage & oxidative stress in recurrent spontaneous abortion (RSA). Indian J Med Res. 2011;133:550-1.
  3. Practice Committee of American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Definitions of infertility and recurrent pregnancy loss: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(1):63.
  4. Dutta UR, Rajitha P, Pidugu VK, Dalal AB. Cytogenetic abnormalities in 1162 couples with recurrent miscarriages in southern region of India: report and review. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2011;28(2):145-9.
  5. Rull K, Nagirnaja L, Laan M. Genetics of recurrent miscarriage: challenges, current knowledge, future directions. Front Genet. 2012;3:34.
  6. Jauniaux E, Farquharson RG, Christiansen OB, Exalto N. Evidence-based guidelines for the investigation and medical treatment of recurrent miscarriage. Hum Reprod. 2006;21(9):2216-22.
  7. Dudley DJ, Branch DW. New approaches to recur-rent pregnancy loss. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 1989;32 (3):520-32.
  8. Sullivan AE, Silver RM, LaCoursiere DY, Porter TF, Branch DW. Recurrent fetal aneuploidy and recurrent miscarriage. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104(4):784-8.
  9. Philipp T, Philipp K, Reiner A, Beer F, Kalousek DK. Embryoscopic and cytogenetic analysis of 233 missed abortions: factors involved in the pathogenesis of developmental defects of early failed pregnancies. Hum Reprod. 2003;18(8):1724-32.
  10. De Braekeleer M, Dao TN. Cytogenetic studies in couples experiencing repeated pregnancy losses. Hum Reprod. 1990;5(5):519-28.
  11. Elghezal H, Hidar S, Mougou S, Khairi H, Saad A. Prevalence of chromosomal abnormalities in couples with recurrent miscarriage. Fertil steril. 2007;88(3):721-3.
  12. Fryns JP, Van Buggenhout G. Structural chromosome rearrangements in couples with recurrent fetal wastage. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1998;81(2):171-6.
  13. Reindollar RH. Contemporary issues for spontaneous abortion. Does recurrent abortion exist? Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2000;27(3):541-54.
  14. Franssen MT, Korevaar JC, Leschot NJ, Bossuyt PM, Knegt AC, Gerssen-Schoorl KB, et al. Selective chromosome analysis in couples with two or more miscarriages: case-control study. BMJ. 2005;331(7509):137-41.
  15. World Health Organization, Department of Reproductive Health and Research. WHO laboratory manual for the examination and processing of human semen. 5th ed. Geneva: World Health Or-ganization; 2010. 287 p.
  16. Keymolen K, Van Berkel K, Vorsselmans A, Staessen C, Liebaers I. Pregnancy outcome in carriers of Robertsonian translocations. Am J Med Genet A. 2011;155A(10):2381-5.
  17. Rowley JD, Pergament E. Possible non random selection of D group chromosomes involved in centric fusion translocations. Ann Genet. 1969;12(3):177-83.
  18. Hecht F, Kimbling WJ. Patterns of D chromosome involvement in human (DqDq) and (DqGq) Robertsonian rearrangements. Am J Hum Genet. 1971;23(4):361-7.
  19. Therman E, Susman B, Deniston D. The nonrandom participation of human acrocentric chromosomes in Robertsonian translocations. Ann Hum Genet. 1989;(Pt 1):49-65.
  20. Choo KH, Vissel B, Brown R, Filby RG, Earle E. Homologous alpha satellite sequences on human acrocentric chromosomes with selectivity for chromosome 13, 14 and 21: implications for recombination between nonhomologous and Robertsonian translocations. Nucleic Acids Res. 1988;16(4):1273-84.
  21. Choo KH, Vissel B, Earle E. Evolution of alphasatellite DNA on human acrocentric chromosomes. Genomics. 1989;5(2):332-44.
  22. Shaffer LG, Jackson-Cook CK, Stasiowski BA, Spence JE, Brown JA. Parental origin determination in thirty de novo Robertsonian translocations. Am J Med Genet. 1992;43(6):957-63.
  23. Sullivan BA, Jenkins LS, Karson EM, Leana-Cox J, Schwartz S. Evidence for structural heterogeneity from molecular cytogenetic analysis of dicentric Robertsonian translocations. Am J Hum Genet. 1996;59(1):167-75.
  24. Robinson WP, Bernasconi F, Basaran S, YükselApak M, Neri G, Serille F, et al. A somatic origin of homologous Robertsonian translocations and isochromosomes. Am J Hum Genet. 1994;54(2):290-302.
  25. Wang W, Lan H. Rapid and parallel chromosomal number reductions in muntjac deer inferred from mitochondrial DNA phylogeny. Mol Biol Evol 2000;17(9):1326-33.
  26. Causio F, Fischetto R, Sarcina E, Geusa S, Tartagni M. Chromosome analysis of spontaneous abortions after in vitro fertilization (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2002;105(1):44-8.
  27. Li TC, Makris M, Tomsu M, Tuckerman E, Laird S. Recurrent miscarriage: aetiology, management and prognosis. Hum Reprod Update. 2002;8(5):463-81.
  28. Maeda T, Ohno M, Shimada N, Nishida M, Jobo T. A 22/22 translocation carrier with recurrent abortions demonstrated by a Giemsa banding technique. Hum Genet. 1976;31(2):243-5.
  29. Mameli M, Cardia S, Milia A, Seabright M. A further case of a 22;22 Robertsonian translocation associated with recurrent abortions. Hum Genet. 1978;41(3):359-61.
  30. Granat M, Aloni T, Makler A, Dar H. Autosomal translocation in an apparently normospermic male as a cause of habitual abortion. J Reprod Med. 1981;26(1):52-5.
  31. Ocak Z, Özlü T, Ozyurt O. Association of recurrent pregnancy loss with chromosomal abnormalities and hereditary thrombophilias. Afr Health Sci. 2013;13(2):447-52.
  32. Kiani MA, Shakibaie MZ, Kariminejad MH. A 22; 22 Robertsonian Translocation in a Patient with Repeated Abortions. Arch Iran Med. 2000;3(3):1-3.
  33. Lewis BV, Ridler MA. Recurrent abortion associated with a balanced 22;22 translocation, or isochromosome 22q in a monozygous twin. Hum Genet. 1977;37(1):81-5.
  34. Zhao WW, Wu M, Chen F, Jiang S, Su H, Liang J, et al. Robertsonian translocations: an overview of 872 Robertsonian translocations identified in a diagnostic laboratory in China. PLoS One. 2015;10(5):e0122647.
  35. Kotzot D. Complex and segmental uniparental disomy (UPD): review and lessons from rare chromosomal complements. J Med Genet. 2001;38(8):497-507.
  36. Chang LW, Lee IW, Kuo PL, Kuan LC. Maternal derivative chromosome 9 and recurrent pregnancy loss. Fertil Steril. 2007;88(4):968.e1-3.
  37. Liehr T. Cases with uniparental disomy [Internet]. Jena, Germany: Jena University Hospital; 2017 [cited 2017 Dec 17]. Available from: http://www. med.uni-jena.de/fish/sSMC/00STARTUPD.htm.
  38. McKinlay Gardner RJ, Sutherland GR, Shaffer LG. Chromosome abnormalities and genetic counselling. 4th ed. USA: Oxford University Press; 2012. 364 p.
  39. Yip MY. Uniparental disomy in Robertsonian translocations: strategies for uniparental disomy testing. Trans Pediatr. 2014;3(2):98-107.
  40. Palmer CG, Schwartz S, Hodes M. Transmission of a balanced homologous t (22q; 22q) translocation from mother to normal daughter. Clin Genet. 1980;17(6):418-22.
  41. Kirkels VG, Hustinx TW, Scheres JM. Habitual abortion and translocation (22q;22q): unexpected transmission from a mother to her phenotypically normal daughter. Clin Genet. 1980;18(6):456-61.
  42. Schinzel AA, Basaran S, Bernasconi F, Karaman B, Yüksel-Apak M, Robinson W. Maternal uniparental disomy 22 has no impact on the phenotype. Am J Hum Genet 1994;54(1):21-4.
  43. Donnai D. NICHD conference. Robertsonian translocations: clues to imprinting. Am J Med Genet. 1993;46(6):681-2.
Journal of Reproduction & Infertility
Volume 19, Issue 1
Winter 2018
Pages 61-66