Cargando…

Prenatal Diagnosis of Clubfoot: Where Are We Now? Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The primary methods for prenatal diagnosis of Clubfoot are ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). An ultrasound is performed between the 1st trimester and the 28th week of pregnancy and it is reported to be used as a diagnostic method alone or in combination with MRI. So far, an inter...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ruzzini, Laura, De Salvatore, Sergio, Longo, Umile Giuseppe, Marino, Martina, Greco, Alessandra, Piergentili, Ilaria, Costici, Pier Francesco, Denaro, Vincenzo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8700252/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34943470
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11122235
_version_ 1784620712268398592
author Ruzzini, Laura
De Salvatore, Sergio
Longo, Umile Giuseppe
Marino, Martina
Greco, Alessandra
Piergentili, Ilaria
Costici, Pier Francesco
Denaro, Vincenzo
author_facet Ruzzini, Laura
De Salvatore, Sergio
Longo, Umile Giuseppe
Marino, Martina
Greco, Alessandra
Piergentili, Ilaria
Costici, Pier Francesco
Denaro, Vincenzo
author_sort Ruzzini, Laura
collection PubMed
description The primary methods for prenatal diagnosis of Clubfoot are ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). An ultrasound is performed between the 1st trimester and the 28th week of pregnancy and it is reported to be used as a diagnostic method alone or in combination with MRI. So far, an international consensus on the most effective screening method has not been reached. This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to establish the most effective and reliable exam for prenatal diagnosis of Clubfoot. The literature search was conducted using a PIOS-approach from May 2021 to June 2021. Studies reporting cases of prenatal diagnosis of Clubfoot made through US and MRI conducted from January 2010 to June 2021 were included in the study and reviewed by 2 authors. The 23 selected studies included 2318 patients. A total of 11 of the studies included details on the accuracy, while the rest were used to obtain information about the primary methodology utilized. In all the selected studies, US was used as the primary diagnostic instrument. Thirteen of the studies used the US exclusively, while three used MRI in addition to US and seven performed karyotyping after US diagnosis. The US has been shown to be the instrument of choice for the prenatal diagnosis of Clubfoot. International guidelines for an ultrasonography classification of congenital clubfoot are required to reduce the inter-variability accuracy of this procedure.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8700252
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87002522021-12-24 Prenatal Diagnosis of Clubfoot: Where Are We Now? Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Ruzzini, Laura De Salvatore, Sergio Longo, Umile Giuseppe Marino, Martina Greco, Alessandra Piergentili, Ilaria Costici, Pier Francesco Denaro, Vincenzo Diagnostics (Basel) Systematic Review The primary methods for prenatal diagnosis of Clubfoot are ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). An ultrasound is performed between the 1st trimester and the 28th week of pregnancy and it is reported to be used as a diagnostic method alone or in combination with MRI. So far, an international consensus on the most effective screening method has not been reached. This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to establish the most effective and reliable exam for prenatal diagnosis of Clubfoot. The literature search was conducted using a PIOS-approach from May 2021 to June 2021. Studies reporting cases of prenatal diagnosis of Clubfoot made through US and MRI conducted from January 2010 to June 2021 were included in the study and reviewed by 2 authors. The 23 selected studies included 2318 patients. A total of 11 of the studies included details on the accuracy, while the rest were used to obtain information about the primary methodology utilized. In all the selected studies, US was used as the primary diagnostic instrument. Thirteen of the studies used the US exclusively, while three used MRI in addition to US and seven performed karyotyping after US diagnosis. The US has been shown to be the instrument of choice for the prenatal diagnosis of Clubfoot. International guidelines for an ultrasonography classification of congenital clubfoot are required to reduce the inter-variability accuracy of this procedure. MDPI 2021-11-29 /pmc/articles/PMC8700252/ /pubmed/34943470 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11122235 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Ruzzini, Laura
De Salvatore, Sergio
Longo, Umile Giuseppe
Marino, Martina
Greco, Alessandra
Piergentili, Ilaria
Costici, Pier Francesco
Denaro, Vincenzo
Prenatal Diagnosis of Clubfoot: Where Are We Now? Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title Prenatal Diagnosis of Clubfoot: Where Are We Now? Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full Prenatal Diagnosis of Clubfoot: Where Are We Now? Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Prenatal Diagnosis of Clubfoot: Where Are We Now? Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Prenatal Diagnosis of Clubfoot: Where Are We Now? Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_short Prenatal Diagnosis of Clubfoot: Where Are We Now? Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_sort prenatal diagnosis of clubfoot: where are we now? systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8700252/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34943470
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11122235
work_keys_str_mv AT ruzzinilaura prenataldiagnosisofclubfootwherearewenowsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT desalvatoresergio prenataldiagnosisofclubfootwherearewenowsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT longoumilegiuseppe prenataldiagnosisofclubfootwherearewenowsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT marinomartina prenataldiagnosisofclubfootwherearewenowsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT grecoalessandra prenataldiagnosisofclubfootwherearewenowsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT piergentiliilaria prenataldiagnosisofclubfootwherearewenowsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT costicipierfrancesco prenataldiagnosisofclubfootwherearewenowsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT denarovincenzo prenataldiagnosisofclubfootwherearewenowsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis