ArticleBMC medical genomics2025
Analysis of prenatal diagnosis and pregnancy outcomes for rare autosomal trisomies detected by non-invasive prenatal testing in 33,079 cases.
Article in BMC medical genomics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perinatal outcomes of fetal CNVs detected by genome-wide non-invasive prenatal testing in Japan.Journal of human genetics · 2026Article
- Performance and clinical implications of non-invasive prenatal testing for rare chromosomal abnormalities: a retrospective study of 94,125 cases.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNon-invasive prenatal testing is widely used for screening common fetal aneuploidy disorders such as trisomy 21, trisomy 18, and trisomy 13. However, its ability to detect rare autosomal trisomies has introduced a new layer of complexity and clinical uncertainty.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on the prenatal diagnostic results and pregnancy outcomes of cases identified as high-risk for rare autosomal trisomies through non-invasive prenatal testing at the reproductive medicine center, Renmin hospital, Hubei university of medicine, from 2015 to 2023.
results66 cases identified as high-risk for rare autosomeal trisomies, yielding a detection rate of 0.20% (66/33,079). 7 declined amniocentesis, while the others underwent the procedure. Prenatal diagnostic procedures did not confirm the presence of the corresponding rare autosomal trisomy in any of these cases. Among the 66 cases of rare autosomal trisomies (RATs), 5 cases were lost to follow-up, and 1 case underwent termination of pregnancy (TOP) for personal reasons, leaving 60 cases with valid pregnancy outcomes. Of these 60 valid outcomes, 50 (83.33%) resulted in full-term births, while 10 (16.67%) experienced adverse pregnancy outcomes.
conclusionPrenatal diagnosis for high-risk rare autosomal trisomies typically reveals a normal karyotype with no detectable chromosomal abnormalities, and most cases can achieve full-term pregnancy outcomes. However, adverse pregnancy outcomes such as preterm birth, fetal demise, placental abnormalities, and intrauterine growth restriction are common and should be given clinical attention and consideration.
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.