ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2024
Bovine aortic arch: a potential indicator that may not serve in prenatal diagnosis - a study based on fetal anatomy, genetics, and postnatal clinical outcomes.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2024. 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.
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the structural abnormalities, genetic results, and postnatal clinical outcomes of fetuses with bovine aortic arch (Bovine Aortic Arch, BAA) to provide a basis for prenatal counseling and management.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 216 fetuses diagnosed with bovine aortic arch through prenatal ultrasound screening at the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University and the No.901 Hospital of the Joint Service of the People's Liberation Army from January 2019 to February 2023. Their family history of genetic diseases, prenatal screening results, and postnatal follow-up data were collected. The fetuses were divided into an isolated BAA group (n = 192) and a non-isolated BAA group (n = 24). Chromosomal karyotyping and copy number variation (CNV) testing were conducted, and statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 22.0 software.
resultsOf the 216 fetuses with BAA, 192 were isolated BAA (88.89%), and 24 were non-isolated BAA (11.11%). Among the isolated BAA fetuses, only 1 case (0.52%) had chromosomal karyotype and pathogenic CNV abnormalities. Among the non-isolated BAA fetuses, 4 cases (16.67%) had chromosomal or CNV abnormalities, but the overall risk was low. The postnatal outcomes of isolated BAA fetuses were good (99.48%), while 79.17% of non-isolated BAA fetuses had good postnatal outcomes.
conclusionMost BAA fetuses are isolated, with a very low incidence of chromosomal abnormalities and pathogenic CNVs, and have good postnatal outcomes. The clinical value of isolated BAA is limited, and invasive prenatal diagnosis is not recommended for low-risk populations. Prenatal screening should focus on the risk of concurrent severe structural anomalies and chromosomal abnormalities.
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.