ArticlePrenatal diagnosis2026
Evolving Practices in Prenatal Open Spinal Dysraphism: A Global Survey of Selection Criteria, Surgical Techniques, and Diagnostic Trends.
Article in Prenatal diagnosis, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evolving Practices in Prenatal Open Spinal Dysraphism: A Global Survey of Selection Criteria, Surgical Techniques, and Diagnostic Trends.Prenatal diagnosis · 2026Article
- Advances in the prevention and prenatal treatment of spina bifida.Discoveries (Craiova, Romania)Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo provide an updated overview of international clinical practice in prenatal repair of open spinal dysraphism (OSD), focusing on evolving eligibility criteria, surgical techniques, and diagnostic standards.
methodsA structured online survey was distributed to 83 fetal surgery centers worldwide. The questionnaire addressed surgical techniques, maternal and fetal eligibility and diagnostic standards. Descriptive analyses were performed to identify current trends and practice variations.
results38 centers from 16 countries participated in the survey (response rate 45.8%). Open fetal surgery remains the most common approach (51.4%) though 47.4% reported offering multiple techniques, including fetoscopic methods. Compared with the MOMS criteria, 42.4% performed surgery beyond 25.6 weeks of gestation, 52.4% accepted a BMI 35%-40% and 28.6% acc epted even a BMI of 41%-45%, and 42.4% treated women with prior uterine surgery. Most centers (87.9%) combined ultrasound and MRI for preoperative imaging. Genetic evaluation was heterogeneous: 66.7% required karyotyping, 63.6% required chromosomal microarray, 18.2% non-invasive testing, and 6.1% required none. Prognostic indicators such as ventriculomegaly and motor function increasingly influence selection decisions.
conclusionInternational practice in prenatal OSD repair shows broadening maternal eligibility, diversification of surgical approaches, and variable diagnostic strategies. These findings highlight a shift toward individualised care and emphasise the need for further studies to evaluate the impact of practice adaptations.
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.