Cited by 176Spinal Dysraphism and MalformationsFetal and Pediatric Neurological DisordersPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics

Posterior brain in fetuses with open spina bifida at 11 to 13 weeks

Lachmann, Robert, Chaoui, Rabih, Moratalla, Jose, Picciarelli, Gemma, Nicolaides, Kypros H.·2011·Prenatal Diagnosis

Abstract

Objective: To measure the changes in the posterior fossa in first‐trimester fetuses with open spina bifida (OSB). Methods: The brain stem diameter and brain stem to occipital bone (BSOB) diameter were measured in stored images of the mid‐sagittal view of the fetal face at 11+0 to 13+6 weeks from 30 fetuses with OSB and 1000 normal controls. Results: In the control group, the brain stem and BSOB diameter increased significantly with crown‐rump length (CRL) and the brain stem to BSOB ratio decreased. In the spina bifida group, the brain stem diameter was above the 95th percentile of the control group in 29 (96.7%) cases, the BSOB diameter was below the 5th percentile in 26 (86.7%) and the brain stem to BSOB ratio was above the 95th percentile in all cases. Conclusions: At 11 to 13 weeks the majority of fetuses with OSB have measurable abnormalities in the posterior brain. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/pd.2632

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Abnormalities in the cranial posterior fossa serve as a valuable ultrasound marker of spinal abnormalities.

    “and therefore serves as a valuable ultrasound marker of spinal abnormalities [75].”
  • Abnormalities in the cranial posterior fossa are associated with open spina bifida in the majority of cases.

    “as published data have shown that abnormalities in this anatomic area are associated with open spina bifida in the majority of cases”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lachmann, R., Chaoui, R., Moratalla, J., Picciarelli, G., & Nicolaides, K. H.
Affiliations
  • University College Hospital (GB)
  • Harris Birthright Research Centre for Fetal Medicine (GB)
Corresponding author
Nicolaides, Kypros H.
Venue
Prenatal Diagnosis
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-12-28
Volume
31
Issue
1
Pages
103-106
ISSN
  • 0197-3851 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0223
OpenAlex
W2077830707
Cited by
176
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 20
FWCI
14.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Prenatal Diagnosis (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Fetal Medicine Foundation (1037116)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Spinal Dysraphism and Malformations
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Fetal and Pediatric Neurological Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Keywords
open spina bifida, posterior fossa, fetal brain anomalies, crown-rump length
MeSH terms
Brain, Brain Stem, Echoencephalography, Female, Gestational Age, Humans, Occipital Bone, Pregnancy, Observer Variation, Spina Bifida Cystica, Ultrasonography, Prenatal, Crown-Rump Length, Nuchal Translucency Measurement

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review