ArticlePediatric radiology2016
Ultrasound and MR imaging findings in prenatal diagnosis of craniosynostosis syndromes.
Article in Pediatric radiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prenatal diagnosis of Apert syndrome caused by a de novo FGFR2 mutation in the second trimester: a case report.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Genetic Disorders Detectable by Fetal MRI: A Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- From FGFR2 mutations to precision management: a review of prenatal diagnosis and multidisciplinary interventions in apert syndrome.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Review
- Emphasis on Early Prenatal Diagnosis and Perinatal Outcomes Analysis of Apert Syndrome.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Craniofacial phenotyping with fetal MRI: a feasibility study of 3D visualisation, segmentation, surface-rendered and physical models.BMC medical imaging · 2024Article
- Unraveling the Complexity of Apert Syndrome: Genetics, Clinical Insights, and Future Frontiers.Cureus · 2023Review
- Differential diagnosis of syndromic craniosynostosis: a case series.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2022Article
- Contribution of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in the analysis of fetal craniofacial malformations.Pediatric radiology · 2021Article
- Magnetic resonance imaging of the fetal musculoskeletal system.Pediatric radiology · 2020Review
- Apert syndrome: prenatal diagnosis challenge.BMJ case reports · 2019Article
- Prenatal ultrasonography of craniofacial abnormalities.Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea) · 2019Article
- Fetal neuroimaging: an update on technical advances and clinical findings.Pediatric radiology · 2018Review
- Apert Syndrome With FGFR2 758 C > G Mutation: A Chinese Case Report.Frontiers in genetics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCraniosynostosis syndromes are uncommonly encountered in the prenatal period. Identification is challenging but important for family counseling and perinatal management.
objectiveThis series examines prenatal findings in craniosynostosis syndromes, comparing the complementary roles of US and MRI and emphasizing clues easily missed in the second trimester. MATERIALS AND
methodsSix prenatal cases evaluated from 2002 through 2011 were retrospectively reviewed. Referral history, gestational age, and sonographic and MRI findings were reviewed by three pediatric radiologists. Abnormalities of the calvarium, hands, feet, face, airway and central nervous system were compared between modalities.
resultsThe diagnosis was Apert syndrome in three, Pfeiffer syndrome in two and Carpenter syndrome in one. The gestational age at evaluation ranged from 21 to 33 weeks. All six were evaluated by MRI and US, with two undergoing repeat evaluation in the third trimester, yielding a total of eight MRIs and US exams. The referral history suggested cloverleaf skull in two cases but did not suggest craniosynostosis syndrome in any case. In four, the referral suggested central nervous system (CNS) findings that were not confirmed by MRI; additional CNS findings were discovered in the remaining two. In four cases, developing turricephaly resulted in a characteristic "lampshade" contour of the fetal head. Hypertelorism and proptosis were present in five, with proptosis better appreciated by MRI. Digit abnormalities were present in all, seen equally well by MRI and US. Lung abnormalities in the second trimester in one fetus resolved by the third trimester.
conclusionPrenatal diagnosis of craniosynostosis syndromes is difficult prior to the third trimester. MRI and US have complementary roles in evaluation of these patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.