Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41133498›Full record

ReviewMedical sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2025

The Pathophysiology of Wharton's Jelly and Its Impact on Fetal and Neonatal Outcomes: A Comprehensive Literature Review.

Tudor-Andrei Butureanu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Tudor-Andrei ButureanuDepartment of Mother and Child, Grigore T. Popa University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 700115 Iasi, Romania.ORCID 0000-0002-6524-145X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wharton's jelly (WJ), the mucoid connective tissue of the umbilical cord, provides essential protection to the umbilical vessels against mechanical stress. While research into WJ-derived stem cells for regenerative medicine has surged, the clinical significance of its in utero pathologies remains less explored. This review synthesizes the current literature on the pathophysiology of WJ abnormalities and their direct impact on fetal and neonatal outcomes. Pathologies are broadly categorized as quantitative (absence/reduction or excess/edema) and structural (pseudocysts, mucoid degeneration). A reduction or segmental absence of WJ critically compromises cord integrity, leading to vascular compression and is a direct cause of stillbirth, fetal growth restriction (FGR), and intrapartum distress. Conversely, excessive WJ or edema is associated with maternal diabetes and fetal hydrops and can also impair hemodynamics. Umbilical cord pseudocysts, arising from focal WJ degeneration, are significant markers for severe chromosomal abnormalities, particularly Trisomy 18 and 13, and other structural defects, especially when persistent or multiple. Sonographic measurement of WJ area shows promise as a surrogate for placental function, with decreased area correlating with placental pathology and FGR. However, significant diagnostic challenges persist, particularly the prenatal detection of segmental WJ absence, a "silent" pathology often discovered only after a catastrophic event. This review highlights the critical role of WJ integrity in determining perinatal outcomes and underscores the urgent need for improved diagnostic modalities and standardized management protocols to mitigate associated risks.

Indexed as

Wharton JellyFemaleFetal Growth RetardationHumansInfant, NewbornPregnancyPregnancy OutcomeUmbilical Cordfetal outcomesneonatalumbilical cordwharton’s jelly

Identifiers

PMID41133498
PMCPMC12551069

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.