SynthesisPediatric surgery international2025
Prenatal imaging for hypospadias: a bayesian analysis-based systematic review of diagnostic accuracy and key imaging features.
Synthesis in Pediatric surgery international, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe antenatal diagnosis of hypospadias has implications for parental counselling, decision-making and organizing postnatal management. Recent imaging advancements have enabled antenatal detection of hypospadias with significant implications for parental psychology and clinical management. However, there is considerable variability in the application of the diagnostic techniques and their reliability or diagnostic accuracy.
objectiveTo assess the diagnostic accuracy of prenatal imaging modalities in the antenatal detection of hypospadias using a Bayesian statistical framework and to identify key imaging features that enhance prenatal diagnosis. MATERIALS AND
methodsComprehensive searches across PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar identified primary research on antenatal hypospadias diagnosis, which was subject to systematic review as per PRISMA guidelines. A Bayesian model employing non-informative priors (Beta (1,1)) was used to calculate pooled sensitivity and specificity, along with corresponding 95% credible intervals, enabling the probabilistic quantification of diagnostic uncertainty.
resultsThe review included 34 studies published between 1989 and 2023, representing 280 pregnant females with 282 foetuses. Bayesian analysis revealed high sensitivity (0.87; 95% CrI: 0.80-0.92) and moderate specificity (0.46; 95% CrI: 0.34-0.58), translating into reliable detection of cases, though with a higher risk of false positives. While 2D sonography served as the universal screening tool (100%), supplementary techniques included 3D sonography (32.3%), color Doppler (32.3%) and magnetic resonance imaging (8.8%). Diagnosis occurred at a mean gestational age of 26.3 ± 5.5 weeks (range 20-39 weeks). Key imaging features identified were ventral curvature (n = 62), a shortened penile shaft (n = 52), a blunt penile tip (n = 60), Meizner's tulip sign (n = 51) and a bifid scrotum (n = 20). The tulip sign, bifid scrotum and cranially-directed phallus were exclusively associated with proximal variants.
conclusionsWhile 2D-ultrasonography remains the primary investigative modality, antenatal detection of hypospadias may be improved through the integration of 3D ultrasound, Doppler and MRI, particularly in complex cases. Confirmatory postnatal evaluation is crucial to address the moderate specificity and risk of false-positive results. However, there is a need to address the disparities in access to advanced imaging and technical expertise in prenatal diagnosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41201669What 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.