ArticleGenes2021
Phenotypic and Genomic Analysis of Cystic Hygroma in Pigs.
Article in Genes, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genomic insights into the demographic history and local adaptation of wild boars across Eurasia.Cell genomics · 2025Article
- Cystic hygroma in a female suckling pig: a case report.Porcine health management · 2022Article
- Perosomus Elumbis in Piglets: Pathological, Radiological and Cytogenetic Findings.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cystic hygroma is a malformation of the lymphatic and vascular system and is recognized as a benign congenital tumor that affects humans and animals in the perinatal period. This congeni-tal disorder is rarely described in animals, and until today, cystic hygroma in pigs has not been described in the literature. In a purebred Piètrain litter with twelve live-born piglets, cystic hy-groma was noticed on the rump of two male pigs within the first week of life. In addition, a third case of a crossbred weaner (Large White × Landrace) was detected during a herd examina-tion. To rule out common differential diagnoses, e.g., abscess or hematoma, further clinical and pathological investigations were conducted. During clinical examination, a painless and soft mass, which was compressible, was detected on the rump of all affected animals. The ultra-sonographic examination revealed a fluid-filled and cavernous subcutaneous structure. In addi-tion, a puncture of the cyst was conducted, revealing a serosanguinous fluid with negative bacte-riological culture. In all cases, a necropsy was performed, showing that the animals had fluid-filled cysts lined by well-differentiated lymphatic endothelium. Based on the clinicopathological examination, cystic hygroma was diagnosed. Furthermore, SNP array genotyping and whole-genome sequencing was performed and provided no evidence for a chromosomal disorder. In the Piètrain family, several genome regions were homozygous in both affected piglets. None-theless, a dominant acting de novo germline variant could not be ruled out, and therefore differ-ent filtering strategies were used to find pathogenic variants. The herein presented lists of pri-vate variants after filtering against hundreds of control genomes provide no plausible candidate and no shared variants among the two sequenced cases. Therefore, further studies are needed to evaluate possible genetic etiology. In general, systematic surveillance is needed to identify ge-netic defects as early as possible and to avoid the occurrence of losses in the pig population.
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.