ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2026
Prenatal Whole-Genome Sequencing for Fetal Anomalies: Diagnostic Performance, Challenges, and Clinical Implications.
Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2026. 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.
- 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
Prenatal whole-genome sequencing (WGS) is a comprehensive genetic test for fetal anomalies, enabling simultaneous detection of aneuploidies, copy number variants (CNVs), single-nucleotide variants (SNVs), small insertions/deletions, structural variants, and regions of absence of heterozygosity. However, its clinical performance, optimal sequencing strategies, and implementation challenges remain incompletely defined. We conducted a narrative review of PubMed-indexed studies (1966-December 2025) evaluating prenatal WGS in fetuses with structural anomalies. Across 29 studies, diagnostic yield ranged from approximately 20% to 40%, influenced by phenotype complexity, sequencing depth, and study design. Low-coverage WGS (≤5×) reliably detected large chromosomal abnormalities with a performance comparable to chromosomal microarray analysis. Moderate-coverage WGS (20-40×) additionally enabled detection of SNVs and structural variants, providing up to 30% incremental diagnostic yield after uninformative standard testing. Turnaround times were typically 14-21 days. Higher sequencing depth increases detection of variants of uncertain significance (0.6% to 35.7%) and secondary/incidental findings (1.6-30.8%). Prenatal WGS offers meaningful diagnostic value but requires careful patient selection, multidisciplinary expertise, and structured pre- and post-test genetic counseling to ensure responsible integration into routine clinical practice, with careful consideration of clinical benefit and economic feasibility.
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.