ArticlePrenatal diagnosis2026
The Clinical Utility of Sequence-Based Genetic Testing for Fetal Edema Following Non-Diagnostic Microarray Results: A Population-Based Cohort Study.
Article in Prenatal diagnosis, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveUltrasound findings of fetal edema may provide early evidence of a genetic disorder. Our objective was to evaluate the frequency and diagnostic yield of sequencing in a selected population after a non-diagnostic microarray result for fetal edema.
methodFetal edema (nuchal translucency > 3.5 mm, cystic hygroma, hydrops, other types) cases referred for genetic testing (2014-2022) were identified in our laboratory information system. Chart review confirmed associated ultrasound findings, findings from other imaging or pathology, multidisciplinary review, and genetic test utilization. Descriptive analyses determined diagnostic yields.
resultsThere were 114 fetal edema cases with a non-diagnostic microarray result. Multidisciplinary review occurred in 79 (83%) cases, with targeted genes, gene panels, and/or exomes performed in 51 (54%) cases based on clinical assessment. Diagnoses were made in 17 (34%, with 59% providing a recurrence risk of ≥ 25%). RASopathy testing and exomes (with selective criteria) resulted in diagnostic yields of 18.5% and 41.2%, respectively. The highest diagnostic yields were in cases with fetal hydrops and other types of fetal edema (restricted to one body cavity).
conclusionReview of additional testing beyond CMA in this cohort did not attempt to assess the overall yield of sequencing; instead, the study used a selected approach in which cases of fetal edema underwent further testing beyond CMA. In cases with cystic hygroma or increased nuchal translucency, RASopathy panel sequencing provides a good diagnostic yield, and should be offered as standard of care with CMA. Correlation of new and developing prenatal and postnatal findings, along with multidisciplinary team review, may inform additional testing, counseling and pregnancy management options, and is particularly important to consider in cases presenting with non-immune fetal hydrops.
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.