ArticleBMC pediatrics2025
Clinical analysis of karyotypes and phenotypes in 87 cases of Turner syndrome during transitional period.
Article in BMC pediatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Fertility preservation in turner syndrome: a case report integrating clinical presentation with genomic and molecular mechanistic analyses.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Article
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
objectiveThis study aimed to analyze the phenotypic characteristics of patients with Turner syndrome (TS) during the transitional period (12-18 years) and explore associations between clinical manifestations, laboratory findings, imaging features, and karyotypic variations, thereby optimizing clinical management strategies.
methodsChromosomal G-banding was performed on 87 patients with TS admitted to Wuhan Children's Hospital between January 2008 and December 2024. Patients were divided into Group A (cases with X monosomy, 45, X) and Group B (cases with other X chromosomal abnormalities, including mosaicism and structural anomalies). The clinical, laboratory, and imaging features were compared between the two groups.
resultsAmong the 87 patients, 43 (49.43%) were diagnosed with X monosomy, whereas 44 (50.57%) exhibited other X chromosomal abnormalities, including 2 cases (2.29%) with Y chromosome material. Group A exhibited significantly higher rates of facial dysmorphism (95.35% versus 59.09%, P < 0.001), cardiovascular anomalies (41.86% versus 18.18%, P = 0.016), spinal deformities (58.14% versus 34.09%, P = 0.024), renal abnormalities (27.91% versus 4.55%, P = 0.003), and elevated fasting insulin levels (median 9.2 versus 6.7 mIU/mL, P = 0.007) compared to Group B.
conclusionsPatients with transitional TS exhibit diverse karyotypes, with X monosomy may be associated with more severe phenotypes. Karyotype evaluation may help inform individualized monitoring priorities, particularly for cardiovascular, renal, and metabolic comorbidities. These findings support individualized clinical management and multidisciplinary transitional care informed by karyotype.
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.