ArticlePrenatal diagnosis2025
Genetic Diagnosis and Clinical Features of Fetuses With Congenital Diaphragmatic Hernia.
Article in Prenatal diagnosis, 2025. 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
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveCongenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) is a rare abnormality with highly heterogeneous genetic causes. This study investigated chromosomal and monogenic abnormalities in fetal CDH patients and evaluated the efficacy of chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) and whole-exome sequencing (WES) for genetic diagnosis. The clinical features of the patients were also evaluated.
methodsWe evaluated the genetic and clinical data of 51 prenatally diagnosed fetuses with CDH. CMA was performed for every patient. If CMA did not yield diagnostic results, the samples were subjected to WES.
resultsCompared with fetuses with isolated CDH (n = 42), those with non-isolated CDH (n = 9) presented a higher genetic diagnostic rate (22.2% vs. 2.4%). The overall diagnostic yield was 5.9%, comprising 3.9% from chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) and an additional 2.0% from whole exome sequencing (WES). CMA identified (1) mosaic trisomy 18 in a patient with isolated CDH; and (2) 4q terminal deletion syndrome in a patient with non-isolated CDH. WES identified a novel missense mutation, PLS3 c.1763A > G, associated with X-linked CDH in a patient with non-isolated CDH and a family history of recurrent CDH.
conclusionGenetic testing should be offered for all fetuses with CDH, regardless of whether the cases are isolated or non-isolated. WES should be considered if CMA fails to provide a diagnostic result, particularly in patients with non-isolated CDH and a family history of recurrent CDH.
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.