ArticleScientific reports2025
Precision fetal cardiology detects cyanotic congenital heart disease using maternal saliva metabolome and artificial intelligence.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantitative Ultrasound Imaging and Artificial Intelligence in Neonatal Echocardiography: Methodological Advances, Reproducibility Challenges, and Computational Perspectives.Journal of imaging · 2026Review
- The Impact of Maternal Obesity and Diabetes on the Development of Congenital Heart Defects (CHDs) in Offspring: A Narrative Review.Metabolites · 2026Review
- Clinical perspectives on wearable devices for pediatric cyanotic congenital heart disease: an expert survey to inform the early development of a multiparametric wearable biosensor.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Prenatal Metabolomics Analysis and Fetal Congenital Anomalies and Genetic Conditions: A Review of Current Literature.Prenatal diagnosis · 2025Review
- Genetic and Environmental Contributors To Congenital Heart Disease.Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prenatal sonographic diagnosis of congenital heart disease (CHD) can lead to improved morbidity and mortality. However, the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound, the sole prenatal screening tool, remains limited. Failed prenatal or early newborn detection of cyanotic CHD (CCHD) can have disastrous consequences. We therefore sought to use a Precision Fetal Cardiology based approach combining metabolomic profiling of maternal saliva and machine learning, a major branch of artificial intelligence (AI), for the prenatal detection of isolated, non-syndromic cyanotic CHD. Metabolomic analyses using Ultra-High Performance Liquid Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry identified 468 metabolites in the saliva. Six different AI platforms were utilized for the detection of CCHD and CHD overall. AI achieved excellent accuracy for the CCHD detection: Area Under the ROC curve: AUC (95% CI) = 0.819 (0.635-1.00) with a sensitivity and specificity of 92.5% and 87.0%, and for CHD overall: AUC (95% CI) = 0.828 (0.635-1.00) with a sensitivity of 90.5% and specificity of 88.0%. Similarly high accuracies were achieved for the detection of CHD overall: AUC (95% CI) = 0.8488 (0.635-1.00) with a sensitivity of 92.5% and specificity of 91.0%. Pathway analysis showed significant alterations in Arachidonic Acid, Alpha-linoleic acid, and Tryptophan metabolism indicating significant lipid dysfunction in cyanotic CHD. In summary, we report for the first time, the accurate detection of non-syndromic cyanotic CHD using maternal salivary metabolomics. Further, analysis revealed significant alteration of lipid metabolism.
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.