ArticleActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2026
Prenatal diagnosis and perinatal outcomes of fetuses with congenital duodenal obstruction: A nine-year retrospective study from China.
Article in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 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.
- Prenatal diagnosis and perinatal outcomes of fetuses with congenital duodenal obstruction: A nine-year retrospective study from China.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 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
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionCongenital duodenal obstruction (CDO) is one of the most common fetal gastrointestinal anomalies, but previous prenatal studies tend to investigate CDO as a portion of gastrointestinal obstruction. Few studies describe the genetic findings of CDO, especially copy number variants, in fetal cohorts with a relatively large sample size. The study aims to investigate the detection rate of genetic causes at different levels and to explore the potential influencing factors of perinatal outcomes of fetuses with CDO. MATERIAL AND
methodsThis retrospective study analyzed karyotype, chromosomal microarray analysis, and trio-whole exome sequencing (trio-WES) results of singleton fetuses suspected of CDO in a tertiary center between January 2014 and September 2023. In addition, perinatal outcomes and postnatal medical records of enrolled cases were followed up and analyzed.
resultsA total of 98 fetuses were included in the study, of which 69 (70.4%) were classified as isolated CDO and 29 (29.6%) were classified as non-isolated. The overall rate of genetic anomalies was 20.4% (20/98). Trisomy 21 (9/98 [9.2%]) and microduplication of the 17q12 region (3/98 [3.2%]) were the most common chromosomal numerical abnormalities and pathogenic copy number variants found in this cohort, respectively. Compared to chromosomal microarray analysis, no additional pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants were found in seven cases undergoing trio-WES. The rate of chromosomal numerical and structural abnormalities was significantly higher in the non-isolated group (8/29 [27.6%] vs. 6/69 [8.7%], p < 0.05). In terms of perinatal outcomes, the live birth rate was significantly higher in the isolated group (52/69 [75.4%] vs. 15/29 [51.7%], p < 0.05) largely due to fewer terminations of pregnancy. All cases with positive genetic results elected to terminate the pregnancy, and 82% of those with negative results opted to continue the pregnancy. Neonatal mortality was significantly higher in the non-isolated group (2/15 [13.3%] vs. 0/52 [0.0%], p < 0.05). The overall neonatal survival rate was 97.0% (65/67).
conclusionsThe present study highlights the value of prenatal diagnostic testing for fetuses suspected of CDO, both in isolated and non-isolated cases. Genetic diagnostic outcomes exert substantial influence on pregnancy decision-making. Perinatal outcome and short-term prognosis of affected fetuses are reasonably favorable when known genetic causes are excluded.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.