ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Fetal Hydrops: Genetic Dissection of an Unspecific Sonographic Finding-A Comprehensive Review.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
- Therapeutic Termination of Pregnancy Under the Umbrella of Environmental, Socio-Economic Factors and High-Risk Pregnancy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Neonatal management of parvovirus B19-induced hydrops fetalis: a case report.Frontiers in pediatrics · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fetal hydrops is defined as the presence of abnormal fluid collections in two or more intra-fetal compartments. It has been classified based on etiology (immune vs. non-immune), on the presence or absence of other findings (isolated vs. non-isolated) and on the gestational age at presentation (first-, second- or third-trimester). In all cases of non-immune hydrops fetalis, invasive prenatal diagnosis is offered. However, after cytogenetic analyses, 80% of fetuses remain without etiological diagnosis, not allowing one to define the prognosis and to formulate recurrence risks. Several geneticists recommend performing either a next-generation sequencing panel (commonly limited to RASopathy testing) or exome sequencing, if cytogenetic tests are inconclusive. In the literature, the data are extremely heterogeneous, due to the differences in these indications and the limitation of study to a select group of genes. The identification of the underlying cause is crucial, as prognostic information and even therapy options are becoming increasingly available for a wide and growing array of genetic conditions. A systematic approach would allow an overall evaluation of the diagnostic rate of the exome sequencing in fetal effusions, also calculating the prevalence of associated diseases, with the aim of obtaining a diagnosis, defining the most appropriate management for each case, and broadening the spectrum of conditions known to be associated with hydrops.
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.