ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025
Rethinking fetal central nervous system anomalies: predicting central nervous system anomalies with corpus callosum to head circumference and occipitofrontal diameter ratios.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comment on "super-resolution MRI-derived brainstem and cerebellar volumes in fetuses between 22 weeks and 32 weeks of gestation".Pediatric radiology · 2026Article
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
backgroundPrenatal diagnosis of fetal central nervous system (CNS) anomalies remains challenging and is influenced by various factors, including imaging equipment quality, and access to advanced modalities such as fetal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). In resource-limited settings, these constraints highlight the need for practical and accessible screening methods. This study aims to evaluate the predictive value of the fetal corpus callosum length-to-head circumference (CCL/HC) and corpus callosum length-to-occipitofrontal (CCL/OFD) diameter ratios in the detection of fetal central CNS abnormalities. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis prospective cohort study included 243 singleton pregnancies undergoing routine mid-trimester ultrasound between November 2024 and May 2025. 15 fetuses with CNS anomalies confirmed by fetal MRI constituted the patient group. Diagnosed anomalies included schizencephaly, lissencephaly, vermian agenesis, cerebellar hypoplasia, hydrocephalus, pachygyria, septo-optic dysplasia, and corpus callosum (CC) malformations, particularly hypoplasia. After excluding 22 cases with non-CNS anomalies, maternal diseases, or intrauterine growth restriction, 206 fetuses comprised the control group. The CCL/HC and CCL/OFD ratios were then calculated for analysis and compared between groups.
resultsA total of 221 fetuses were analyzed; CNS anomalies were confirmed in 15 of them, while 206 served as the control group. In the anomaly group, the mean corpus callosum length (CCL) was significantly shorter compared to healthy fetuses (19.27 ± 3.03 mm vs. 23.33 ± 3.50 mm; p < 0.001). Both the CCL/HC and CCL/OFD ratios were significantly lower in fetuses with CNS anomalies (p < 0.001 for both). ROC analysis showed AUC values of 0.833 for CCL/HC and 0.935 for CCL/OFD; the cutoff values were 0.0953 and 0.2658, respectively, with both ratios demonstrating high specificity (99.5%) for anomaly detection. Additionally, both ratios exhibited a moderate positive correlation with gestational age in the control group and remained within the ± 2 standard deviation limits in 97% (CCL/HC) and 95.7% (CCL/OFD) of healthy fetuses.
conclusionFetal CCL/OFD and CCL/HC ratios may offer a practical method for both assessing normal CC development and identifying potential CNS anomalies.
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.