ArticleEClinicalMedicine2025
Performance of ultrasound in detecting fetal hypospadias during pregnancy: a pooled analysis.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prenatal imaging for hypospadias: a bayesian analysis-based systematic review of diagnostic accuracy and key imaging features.Pediatric surgery international · 2025Pooled it
- Hub genes and molecular mechanisms related to hypospadias based on transcriptome sequencing data and bioinformatics analysis.BMC medical genomics · 2026Article
- Effect of intraoperative dexmedetomidine on prognosis in patients with cancer undergoing surgical procedures. Responses to recent commentary.British journal of anaesthesia · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Opinions regarding the role and value of ultrasound in the diagnosis of prenatal hypospadias are diverse. Although hypospadias is not a fatal malformation, a higher degree of severity exerts a significant impact on children's physiology and psychology. On the other hand, hypospadias may be accompanied by accompanying anomalies, syndromic conditions, and fetal growth restriction (FGR). This study aimed to systematically assess the value of ultrasound in the prenatal diagnosis of hypospadias. Methods: In the systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases until June 30, 2024. The key terms included: hypospadias, ultrasound, and prenatal diagnosis. Studies were assessed following the eligibility criteria, and the data from the included studies were extracted through a standardized protocol. The primary outcomes focused on the positive predictive value (PPV), accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of ultrasound for detecting fetal hypospadias. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) scale was used to assess the risk of bias. The PPV was calculated using the bootstrap method. When five or fewer studies were pooled, a random-effect model based on the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman (HKSJ) method was used as a meta-analysis strategy to evaluate the overall effect. Sensitivity and specificity were pooled using a Summary Receiver Operating Characteristic (SROC) curve. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024586840). Findings: A total of nine studies with 600 cases were included in the systematic review. The pooled median gestational age of the included studies was 27.64 ± 3.15 weeks. The overall PPVs of two-dimensional ultrasound (2DUS) in diagnosing fetal hypospadias and external genital malformations were 81% (95% confidence interval (CI): 77%-85%) and 88% (95% CI: 86%-91%), respectively. Upon in-depth analysis of the five studies, the accuracy of 2DUS combined with three-dimensional ultrasound (3DUS) was 84% (95% CI: 78%-89%), and that of 2DUS alone was 74% (95% CI: 69%-78%). The difference between the two methods was 10%. The pooled sensitivity of 2DUS combined with 3DUS in diagnosing fetal hypospadias was 86% (95% CI: 79%-93%), the specificity was 77% (95% CI: 69%-86%), and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.83-0.89). Interpretation: This is the first diagnostic meta-analysis to comprehensively evaluate the detection of fetal hypospadias using ultrasound during pregnancy, indicating that ultrasound is indeed of significant value in the prenatal diagnosis of hypospadias. More research is needed to validate and enhance current research findings and offer more comprehensive guidance for future clinical practice. Funding: This work was supported by the Natural Science Foundation Project of Chongqing, Chongqing Science and Technology Commission (CSTB2022NSCQ-MSX1001) and the Program for Youth Innovation in Future Medicine, Chongqing Medical University (W0109).
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.