ArticlePrenatal diagnosis2026
Celocentesis for Prenatal Diagnosis of Rare Monogenic Diseases: Development, Validation, and Clinical Outcome on 876 Cases.
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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo report on the development, validation, and clinical outcomes of 876 consecutive cases of prenatal diagnosis of rare monogenic diseases using celocentesis.
methodsThis retrospective single-center study, conducted between April 2006 and December 2025, evaluated celomic fluid collected at 7-9 weeks of gestation from women at risk of carrying fetuses with monogenic diseases. Fetal DNA was obtained by isolating embryo-fetal erythroid precursors. All samples were assessed for the presence of parental molecular defects and maternal cell contamination (MCC).
resultsThe median gestational age at the time of celocentesis was 8.4 weeks. Successful aspiration of celomic fluid was achieved in 875/876 cases (99.9%). Although MCC was observed in 98.74% of the samples, an initial subset of 19/190 (10%) was found unsuitable for molecular analysis. Subsequently, an optimized molecular workflow was successfully applied to the remaining cohort, achieving a success rate of 98% (671/685 procedures). Results were validated against confirmatory samples from abortive tissue (following VIP), amniotic fluid, or postnatal blood. All cases were correctly classified, demonstrating 100% sensitivity and specificity.
conclusionThis study supports the clinical application of celocentesis as a reliable early prenatal diagnostic procedure for monogenic diseases. It represents a viable alternative to Chorionic Villus Sampling (CVS) and amniocentesis, enabling invasive prenatal diagnosis at a significantly earlier stage of pregnancy.
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.