ArticleFrontiers in genetics2025
Application of chromosome microarray analysis and karyotyping in fetal cardiac abnormalities.
Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Chromosome microarray analysis (CMA) and karyotyping are two important genetic testing techniques used in prenatal diagnosis. This study aims to evaluate the value of chromosome microarray analysis and karyotyping in the diagnosis of fetal cardiac abnormalities, with particular focus on the detection of genomic copy number variations (CNVs). Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 98 pregnant women diagnosed with fetal cardiac abnormalities through ultrasound between January 2022 and June 2024. Amniotic fluid samples from all participants were subjected to the analysis of karyotyping and Chromosome microarray analysis. The detection rates of both techniques in different types of fetal cardiac abnormalities were compared, and the outcomes of positive cases were followed up. Results: Of the 98 fetuses with cardiac abnormalities, 12 cases showed abnormal genetic results, with a detection rate of 12.24%. Karyotyping identified 5 cases of abnormalities (5.10%), while the chromosome microarray analysis detected 11 cases (11.22%). In the group with isolated cardiac abnormalities (76 cases) and the group with cardiac abnormalities combined with other ultrasound abnormalities (22 cases), karyotyping detected 3.95% (3/76) and 9.09% (2/22) of abnormalities, with no significant statistical difference (P > 0.05). Chromosome microarray analysis detected abnormalities in 6.58% (5/76) of the isolated cardiac abnormalities group and 27.27% (6/22) in the group with combined abnormalities, showing a significant statistical difference (P < 0.05). Of the 12 positive cases, four were live births, eight were terminations, and Conclusion: Chromosome microarray analysis has a higher detection rate in fetuses with cardiac abnormalities than traditional chromosome karyotyping, especially when fetal cardiac abnormalities are combined with other ultrasound abnormalities. It is recommended for clinical use to improve the detection of genetic alterations.
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.