ReviewBMC pregnancy and childbirth2020
Prenatal diagnosis of fetal microhydranencephaly: a case report and literature review.
Review in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe prenatal diagnosis of microhydranencephaly is important and needs to be distinguished from anencephaly, because unlike anencephaly, fetuses with microhydranencephaly can survive after birth. Herein, we report a case of microhydranencephaly that was diagnosed and distinguished from anencephaly prenatally. CASE PRESENTATION: The patient was an 18-year-old woman, 2 gravida nullipara, who presented at 15 weeks of gestation. Ultrasonography showed a normal biparietal diameter (BPD) and no major anomalies. At 23 weeks of gestation, an ultrasound examination revealed a BPD of 40 mm (-5.3 standard deviation, SD). At 29 weeks, anencephaly was suspected despite difficulty in visually examining the fetal head above the orbit. At 34 weeks, insertion of a metreurynter made it possible to observe the skull. Three-dimensional computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) confirmed the presence of the fetal skull, a prominent occipital bone, sloping forehead, marked microcephaly, cerebral loss, and excess cerebrospinal fluid. This allowed differentiation between microhydranencephaly and anencephaly. She delivered vaginally at 37 weeks, and the child had a birth weight of 2342 g and a head circumference of 24 cm (-5.4 SD). The baby's head was flat above the forehead, with a suspected partial head defect. The baby received desmopressin acetate due to central diabetes insipidus 6 months after birth.
conclusionsThe use of multiple imaging modalities and physical manipulation of the fetal head are required to accurately differentiate between microhydranencephaly and anencephaly.
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.