Assessment of the thymus at echocardiography in fetuses at risk for 22q11.2 deletion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: An absent or hypoplastic thymus is common in patients with 22q11.2 deletion (del22q11.2). We sought to determine whether fetal echocardiography could identify absence of the thymus as a diagnostic tool in pregnancies at risk for fetal del22q11.2. METHODS: We evaluated the fetal thymus in 16 consecutive pregnancies at risk for fetal del22q11. Fourteen of the fetuses had a conotruncal cardiac lesion, one had a twin with a conotruncal lesion, and in one the mother had a diagnosis of del22q11.2. The fetal thymus assessment was performed by an individual who was not aware of the del22q11.2 status of the fetus. RESULTS: By 2D imaging, the thymus was identified in the anterosuperior mediastinum as a subtle hypoechogenic area. In nine cases, the thymus was demonstrated prenatally and none had del22q11.2. However, in one case the thymus was only seen on follow-up fetal echocardiography. In six cases, the thymus could not be identified and all six had del22q11.2. In one additional case, analyzed retrospectively, the thymus could not be assessed. The status of the thymus was confirmed on postnatal echocardiography or autopsy in 11 of the 15 cases assessed prenatally. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that fetal echocardiography can assess the thymus in most cases at risk for del22q11.2. This information may be useful in counseling women/couples who decline amniocentesis or who are awaiting amniocentesis results.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".