P71Isolated choroid plexus cysts: a controversial morphologic sonographic marker for chromosomal abnormalities. Our experience in seven years (1993–1999)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
First reported by Chudleigh and colleagues in 1984 and considered ‘benign transient findings with no harmful sequelae’, an association between choroid plexus cysts and trisomy 18 was described by several following publications. Later on further studies have also suggested a significant risk for other chromosomal abnormalities, trisomy 21 in particular, so that literature data report an association between choroid plexus cysts and chromosomal abnormalities in about 8% of cases, more specifically in 1% if isolated and in 46% if associated with other malformations. As a consequence there are now different opinions on clinical significance and management, with some authors advocating karyotyping and others not. The aim of this study was to define the incidence of choroid plexus cysts in an unselected population and describe their association with aneuploidy. In the years 1993–99 a total of 10743 women from an unselected population attending a routine second‐trimester scanning were studied. Everyone underwent a detailed assessment of fetal anatomy by transabdominal sonography. In this period there were 27 fetuses in which choroid plexus cysts were the only sonographic abnormality, giving an incidence of 0.25% (in literature between 0.2 and 3.6%). Karyotyping was performed in only 12 cases, 11 normal and one trisomy 18. At birth the other 15 fetuses were normal. The incidence of aneuploidy was 3.70% (in according with literature review). We did not found association with other chromosomal abnormalities, trisomy 21 in particular. In the majority of cases the final risk remains small, but the presence of choroid plexus cysts increases the risk for aneuploidy, mainly trisomy 18. A need for further and wide studies about soft morphologic sonographic markers it’s necessary to better define their association with chromosomal abnormalities and as a consequence to better select the patients who need karyotyping, not underestimating that they appear in a large percentage of normal fetuses. To combine all the well‐known parameters (maternal and gestational age, serum biochemical screening, soft markers and nuchal translucency) seems to be the better way to adjust the risk of trisomy 21 and that of other chromosomal abnormalities, taking their different natural history into consideration.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".