Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41272104›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2026

Genetic analysis in fetuses with isolated clubfoot: diagnostic insights and added value.

Jana M de Vries, Arda Arduç, Quinten Waisfisz, Maria B Tan-Sindhunata, Brigitte Hw Faas, Elisabeth van Leeuwen, Ingeborg H Linskens, Eva Pajkrt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Jana M de Vries *Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-1822-2686
Arda Arduç *Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. a.arduc@amsterdamumc.nl.ORCID 0009-0007-7157-6014
Quinten WaisfiszDepartment of Human Genetics, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Maria B Tan-SindhunataDepartment of Human Genetics, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4534-9738
Brigitte Hw FaasDepartment of Human Genetics, Radboud university medical center Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2311-7725
Elisabeth van LeeuwenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ingeborg H LinskensDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0009-0005-1509-5182
Eva PajkrtDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study evaluates the diagnostic genetic yield in fetuses sonographically suspect of having isolated clubfoot. We conducted a retrospective study on all fetuses with apparently isolated clubfoot on initial ultrasound, examined between January 2021 and December 2024. Clubfoot was classified as isolated when no additional structural anomalies were observed on initial imaging. Among 218 cases, 140 (64%) were classified as isolated. Prenatal genetic testing was performed in 64 of these cases (46%), of which 61 (95%) underwent both copy number variant (CNV) and single nucleotide variant (SNV) analysis. In 38 of the 61 (62%) cases targeted investigation of the DMPK gene was carried out too. Pathogenic or likely pathogenic causative variants were identified in six of the 61 (9.8%) pregnancies: two of the 26 tested (7.7%) with unilateral clubfoot and four of the 35 tested (11.4%) with bilateral clubfoot. These include SNVs in TRPV4, PTPN11, BBS2, and MED13L (4/61 = 6.6%) and two CNVs, a de novo 22q11.23 deletion, and a de novo 5q21.1q31.1 deletion (2/61 = 3.3%). One case remained unsolved due to the identification of a variant of uncertain significance (VUS) in PIEZO2. Three cases revealed unsolicited findings unrelated to the indication for testing. Our findings highlight the diagnostic yield of prenatal CNV- and SNV-testing in cases of suspected isolated clubfoot, but does not support systemic testing for DMPK. Although broad genetic testing can support diagnosis and counseling, challenges remain in interpreting results and managing unsolicited findings.

Indexed as

ClubfootGenetic TestingPrenatal DiagnosisAdultDNA Copy Number VariationsFemaleFetusHumansPregnancyRetrospective StudiesUltrasonography, Prenatal

Identifiers

PMID41272104
PMCPMC12859071

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.