ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2021
Prenatal Exome Sequencing in Recurrent Fetal Structural Anomalies: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gene List Selection Matters: Missed Diagnoses in Prenatal Exome Sequencing-PanelApp R21 and HPO-Driven Versus OMIM-Based Gene Lists.Prenatal diagnosis · 2026Article
- Prenatal Use of Exome Sequencing and Chromosomal Microarray Analysis: Indications, Interpretation, and Gene Selection Strategies.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Prenatal Exome Sequencing Analysis in Fetuses With Structural Anomalies: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study With Practical Implications.Prenatal diagnosis · 2026Article
- Contribution of uniparental disomy to fetal growth restriction: a whole-exome sequencing series in a prenatal setting.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Prenatal diagnosis of recurrent hypoplastic left heart syndrome associated with MYH6 variants: a case report.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2023Article
- Implementation of Exome Sequencing in Prenatal Diagnostics: Chances and Challenges.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- International Society for Prenatal Diagnosis Updated Position Statement on the use of genome-wide sequencing for prenatal diagnosis.Prenatal diagnosis · 2022Review
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 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To determine the diagnostic yield of exome sequencing (ES), a microarray analysis was carried out of fetuses with recurrent fetal structural anomalies (with similar anomalies in consecutive pregnancies). This is a systematic review conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria. The selected studies describing ES in fetuses with recurrent fetal malformation were assessed using the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) criteria for risk of bias. Incidence was used as the pooled effect size by single-proportion analysis using random-effects modeling (weighted by inverse of variance). We identified nine studies on ES diagnostic yield that included 140 fetuses with recurrent structural anomalies. A pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant was found in 57 fetuses, resulting in a 40% (95%CI: 26% to 54%) incremental performance pool of ES. As expected, the vast majority (86%: 36/42) of the newly identified diseases had a recessive inheritance pattern, and among these, 42% (15/36) of variants were found in homozygosity. Meckel syndrome was the monogenic disease most frequently found, although the genes involved were diverse. The ES diagnostic yield in pregnancies with recurrent fetal structural anomalies was 40% (57/140). Homozygous disease-causing variants were found in 36% (15/57) of the newly identified monogenic disorders.
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.