ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2026
Genetic analysis in fetuses with isolated clubfoot: diagnostic insights and added value.
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.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.