ArticlePregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.)2025
Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Consult Series #74: Cell-free DNA screening for aneuploidies: Updated guidance.
Article in Pregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhancing Prenatal Genetic Evaluation Through the Combination of Single-Gene Non-Invasive Prenatal Screening and Prenatal Imaging.Prenatal diagnosis · 2026Review
- Diagnostic Testing After Positive Cell-Free DNA Screening for Sex Chromosome Aneuploidies: Clinical and Socioeconomic Determinants.Prenatal diagnosis · 2026Article
- The minimum requirements for prenatal "confirmatory" diagnosis of fetal aneuploidy.Pregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Article
- Chromosomal and genetic anomalies in fetuses with nuchal translucency between 3.0 and 3.4 mm: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2026Review
- Complementary Diagnostic Roles of Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing, Chromosomal Microarray Analysis, and Karyotyping in 14,011 High-Risk Pregnancies: A Retrospective Cohort Study with Combined Analyses.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Technological Advances in Molecular Diagnostic Methods for Hereditary Diseases in Preconception and Prenatal Settings.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026Review
- First-Trimester Down Syndrome Screening in Renal-Transplanted Pregnant Women: Blood Creatinine Levels Impact False-Positive Rate.Prenatal diagnosis · 2026Article
- Pregnancy in Patients With Renal Transplant.O&G open · 2026Review
- Prenatal SNP-array chromosomal microarray analysis in 3,549 pregnancies: indication-specific yields and clinical implications.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Clinical Utility of Prenatal cfDNA Screening for Sex Chromosome Aneuploidies: A Single Center Experience.Molecular genetics & genomic medicine · 2026Article
- Genome-Wide Prenatal cfDNA Screening and the Obstetric Incidentalome: Maternal Cancer, Placental Mosaicism, and Pregnancy Risk.International journal of women's health · 2026Review
- Analysis of diagnostic consistency rate and pregnancy outcomes in pregnant women with high-risk NIPT undergoing transabdominal amniocentesis.American journal of translational research · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this Consult, we provide updated guidance on the evolving applications of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening, including its use in detecting sex chromosome aneuploidies and microdeletions and its application in multifetal gestations. We compare cfDNA test performance with conventional screening methods and offer recommendations for managing inconclusive results and unexpected secondary findings. The following are the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine's (SMFM's) recommendations: (1) we recommend that cfDNA screening for common aneuploidies (trisomies 21, 18, and 13) be made routinely available to all obstetrical patients (GRADE 1B); (2) we recommend cfDNA as the most sensitive and specific screening test for common fetal aneuploidies (trisomies 21, 18, and 13) in any patient population. After pretest counseling, every patient has the right to pursue or decline prenatal genetic screening and diagnostic testing (GRADE 1B); (3) we recommend that screening for sex chromosome aneuploidies be made available to obstetrical patients as an "opt-in" consideration with appropriate pretest counseling (GRADE 1C); (4) we do not recommend routine general population screening for any microdeletion condition. Patients who choose to undergo cfDNA screening for 22q11.2 deletion specifically should do so only after appropriate pretest counseling. Pregnant people who are interested in obtaining information regarding the risk for fetal copy number variants should be offered diagnostic testing as opposed to cfDNA screening for microdeletion syndromes (GRADE 1C); (5) we recommend cfDNA as a first-line screening option for trisomy 21 detection in twin gestations (GRADE 1B); (6) although the numbers of affected pregnancies are limited, the detection rates associated with trisomy 18 and 13 appear to be consistently high in twin gestations, and cfDNA screening for these conditions is recommended (GRADE 1B); (7) because of a lack of data, cfDNA screening for sex chromosome aneuploidy in twin gestations and cfDNA screening for higher-order multiples are not recommended (GRADE 1C); (8) we do not recommend the routine use of cfDNA testing for large genome-wide copy number deletions or duplications (GRADE 1C). This document replaces SMFM Consult Series #36: Prenatal aneuploidy screening using cfDNA.
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.