ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2023
Prenatally detected six duplications at Xp22.33-p11.22: a case report.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Complementary role of echocardiography, karyotyping, and chromosomal microarray in congenital cardiac anomalies.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe discrepancy between the results of cytogenetics and the results of chromosome microarray analysis (CMA) has often led to confusion over genetic counselling for prenatal diagnosis. CASE PRESENTATION: The prenatal ultrasound results of a congenital heart defect (CHD) foetus displayed an apartial endocardial pad defect and permanently dilated coronary sinus and left superior vena cava at 21 weeks of gestation. Cytogenetic analysis, CMA, fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) and multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) with foetal cord blood samples were used to detect the genetic aetiology. Routine G-binding cytogenetic analysis showed normal karyotypes in both the foetus' and parents' blood samples. CMA results demonstrated that there were 53.973-Mb recurrent CNVs at Xp22.33-p11.22, as confirmed by MLPA assay.
conclusionsHerein, we described the CNV of six duplications at Xp22.33-p11.22 and the 53.973 Mb duplication CNV that was not found in foetal cord blood samples by conventional cytogenetic methods, and it was confirmed by CMA and MLPA. Our novel findings will provide helpful information for prenatal diagnosis and genetic counselling for foetal CHDs.
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.