ArticlePrenatal diagnosis2020
Maceration determines diagnostic yield of fetal and neonatal whole body post-mortem ultrasound.
Article in Prenatal diagnosis, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Implementation of pediatric and fetal postmortem imaging into clinical practice: a multi-society statement from the ESPR, SPR, SLARP, AOSPR, WFPI, and IAFR.Pediatric radiology · 2026Review
- Differentiating ante-mortem from post-mortem findings on fetal and pediatric post-mortem imaging.Pediatric radiology · 2026Review
- Miscarriage Tissue Research: Still in Its Infancy.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Fetal and neonatal post-mortem imaging referral template: recommendations from the European Society of Paediatric Radiology Post-mortem Task Force.Pediatric radiology · 2024Article
- Post-mortem perinatal imaging: what is the evidence?The British journal of radiology · 2023Review
- Micro-CT yields high image quality in human fetal post-mortem imaging despite maceration.BMC medical imaging · 2021Article
- A pragmatic evidence-based approach to post-mortem perinatal imaging.Insights into imaging · 2021Review
- Maceration determines diagnostic yield of fetal and neonatal whole body post-mortem ultrasound.Prenatal diagnosis · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo determine factors in nondiagnostic fetal and neonatal post-mortem ultrasound (PMUS) examinations.
methodsAll fetal and neonatal PMUS examinations were included over a 5-year study period (2014-2019). Nondiagnostic image quality by body parts (brain, spine, thorax, cardiac, and abdomen) was recorded and correlated with patient variables. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression analyses were performed to identify significant factors for nondiagnostic studies.
resultsTwo hundred sixty-five PMUS examinations were included, with median gestational age of 22 weeks (12-42 wk), post-mortem weight of 363 g (16-4033 g), and post-mortem interval of 8 days (0-39 d). Diagnostic imaging quality was achieved for 178/265 (67.2%) studies. It was high for abdominal (263/265, 99.2%), thoracic (264/265, 99.6%), and spine (265/265, 100%) but lower for brain (210/265, 79.2%) and cardiac imaging (213/265, 80.4%). Maceration was the best overall predictor for nondiagnostic imaging quality (P < .0001). Post-mortem fetal weight was positively associated with cardiac (P = .0133) and negatively associated with brain imaging quality (P = .0002). Post-mortem interval was not a significant predictor.
conclusionsFetal maceration was the best predictor for nondiagnostic PMUS, particularly for brain and heart. Fetuses with marked maceration and suspected cardiac or brain anomalies should be prioritised for post-mortem MRI.
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.