Skip to main content
. 2019 Jan-Mar;12(1):29–34. doi: 10.4103/jhrs.JHRS_125_17

Table 2.

Comparison of results of our study with other studies

Present study Kara N et al. Mohajertehran F et al. El-Dahtory Vijayalakshmi et al. Kalavathi V. et al. Akbar Safaei et al. Joseph A and Thomas IM
Year 2017 2012 2012 2011 2010 2010 2009 1982
Number of cases 174 105 180 223 140 852 220 63
Normal karyotype (%) 151 (86.78) 90 (85.7) 136 (75.55) 177 (79.37) 101 (72.1) 632 (74.18) 176 (80) 53 (84.12)
Total abnormal karyotype (%) 23 (13.21) 15 (14.3) 44 (24.45) 46 (20.63) 39 (27.9) 220 (25.82) 44 (20) 10 (15.87)
XY female (%) 46,XY 10 (5.74) 2 (1.9) 8 (4.4) 2 (0.89) 7 (5) 52 (6.1) 12 (5.5) 1 (1.58)
Numerical abnormality of X (%) 47,XXX 1 (0.57) Not found Not found 2 (0.89) Not found 2 (0.23) Not found 1 (1.58)
Turner (%) 45,X 6 (3.44) 5 (4.8) 21 (11.7) 21 (9.42) 11 (7.8) 50 (5.87) 19 (8.6) 2 (3.17)
Mosaic turner with numerical aberration of X (%) Total mosaic turner: 6 (3.65) 45,X/47,XXX 1 (0.57) Total mosaic turner: 1 (0.95) Not found Not found Not found 2 (0.23) 1 (0.4) Not found
Mosaic turner with structural abnormalities of X (%) 45,X/46, X,iso(X) 1 (0.57) Not found Not found Not found Not found Not found Not found
46,XX,inv(9) 1 (0.57) Not found Not found Not found Not found Not found Not found
45,X/46,X, i(Xq) 1 (0.57) 1 (0.5) Not found 4 (4.9) Not found 1 (0.4) Not found
Mosaic XY female (%) 45,X/46,XY 1 (0.57) 2 (1.1) Not found 1 (0.7) Not found 2 (0.9) Not found
Turner with structural abnormality (%) 46,X,mar(X) 1 (0.57) Not found Not found Not found Not found Not found Not found Not found