ReviewFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2016
The Current Landscape of Genetic Testing in Cardiovascular Malformations: Opportunities and Challenges.
Review in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Heart of Fetal Growth Restriction: Congenital Heart Defects-An Analysis of Risk Factors and Morbidity Outcomes.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
- Evaluating first-line genetic testing strategies for inpatients with congenital heart defects.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Performance of Dysmorphology-Based Screening for Genetic Disorders in Pediatric Congenital Heart Disease Supports Wider Genetic Testing.Molecular genetics & genomic medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Practice variations for fetal and neonatal congenital heart disease within the Children's Hospitals Neonatal Consortium.Pediatric research · 2023Article
- Genetics of congenital heart disease: a narrative review of recent advances and clinical implications.Translational pediatrics · 2021Review
- Challenges in Clinicogenetic Correlations: One Phenotype - Many Genes.Movement disorders clinical practice · 2021Review
- Absence of GATA4 Mutations in Moroccan Patients with Atrial Septal Defect (ASD) Provides Further Evidence of Limited Involvement of GATA4 in Major Congenital Heart Defects.The Eurasian journal of medicine · 2020Article
- Genetic evaluation of patients with congenital heart disease.Current opinion in pediatrics · 2018Review
- Genetic Basis for Congenital Heart Disease: Revisited: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation · 2018Review
- Major Contribution of Genomic Copy Number Variation in Syndromic Congenital Heart Disease: The Use of MLPA as the First Genetic Test.Molecular syndromology · 2017Article
- Comparison of Echocardiography and 64-Multislice Spiral Computed Tomography for the Diagnosis of Pediatric Congenital Heart Disease.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2017Article
- Genetics and Genomics of Congenital Heart Disease.Circulation research · 2017Review
- Recent advances in congenital heart disease genomics.F1000Research · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Human cardiovascular malformations (CVMs) frequently have a genetic contribution. Through the application of novel technologies, such as next-generation sequencing, DNA sequence variants associated with CVMs are being identified at a rapid pace. While clinicians are now able to offer testing with NGS gene panels or whole exome sequencing to any patient with a CVM, the interpretation of genetic variation remains problematic. Variable phenotypic expression, reduced penetrance, inconsistent phenotyping methods, and the lack of high-throughput functional testing of variants contribute to these challenges. This article elaborates critical issues that impact the decision to broadly implement clinical molecular genetic testing in CVMs. Major benefits of testing include establishing a genetic diagnosis, facilitating cost-effective screening of family members who may have subclinical disease, predicting recurrence risk in offsprings, enabling early diagnosis and anticipatory management of CV and non-CV disease phenotypes, predicting long-term outcomes, and facilitating the development of novel therapies aimed at disease improvement or prevention. Limitations include financial cost, psychosocial cost, and ambiguity of interpretation of results. Multiplex families and patients with syndromic features are two groups where disease causation could potentially be firmly established. However, these account for the minority of the overall CVM population, and there is increasing recognition that genotypes previously associated with syndromes also exist in patients who lack non-CV findings. In all circumstances, ongoing dialog between cardiologists and clinical geneticists will be needed to accurately interpret genetic testing and improve these patients' health. This may be most effectively implemented by the creation and support of CV genetics services at centers committed to pursuing testing for 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.