ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023
Prenatal Exome Sequencing Analysis in Fetuses with Various Ultrasound Findings.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Balancing How Much We Want to Know with What We Are Willing to Pay: A Comparative Cost Analysis of Prenatal Cytogenetic Testing and Screening Strategies.Fetal diagnosis and therapy · 2026Article
- Article
- Clinical application of chromosome microarray analysis and karyotyping in prenatal diagnosis in Northwest China.Frontiers in genetics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the use of Exome Sequencing (ES) for the detection of genome-wide Copy Number Variants (CNVs) and the frequency of SNVs-InDels in selected genes related to developmental disorders in a cohort of consecutive pregnancies undergoing invasive diagnostic procedures for minor or simple ultrasound findings with no indication of ES.
methodsWomen undergoing invasive diagnostic testing (chorionic villus sampling or amniocentesis) for QF-PCR and chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) due to prenatal ultrasound findings without an indication for ES were selected over a five-month period (May-September 2021). ES was performed to compare the efficiency of genome-wide CNV detection against CMA analysis and to detect monogenic disorders. Virtual gene panels were selected to target genes related to ultrasound findings and bioinformatic analysis was performed, prioritizing variants based on the corresponding HPO terms. The broad Fetal Gene panel for developmental disorders developed by the PAGE group was also included in the analysis.
resultsA total of 59 out of 61 women consented to participate in this study. There were 36 isolated major fetal anomalies, 11 aneuploidy markers, 6 minor fetal anomalies, 4 multiple anomalies, and 2 other ultrasound signs. Following QF-PCR analysis, two uncultured samples were excluded from this study, and six (10%) common chromosome aneuploidies were detected. In the remaining 51 cases, no pathogenic CNVs were detected at CMA, nor were any pathogenic variants observed in gene panels only targeting the ultrasound indications. Two (3.9%) monogenic diseases, apparently unrelated to the fetal phenotype, were detected: blepharo-cheilo-odontic syndrome (spina bifida) and Duchenne muscular dystrophy (pyelocaliceal dilation).
conclusionsIn our series of pregnancies with ultrasound findings, common aneuploidies were the only chromosomal abnormalities present, which were detected in 10% of cases. ES CNV analysis was concordant with CMA results in all cases. No additional findings were provided by only targeting selected genes based on ultrasound findings. Broadening the analysis to a larger number of genes involved in fetal developmental disorders revealed monogenic diseases in 3.9% of cases, which, although apparently not directly related to the indications, were clinically relevant.
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.