Cerebral Lateral Ventricular Asymmetry: Normal Variant or an Indicator of Underlying Pathology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Isolated lateral ventricular asymmetry has been associated with a favorable prognosis; however, prenatal evaluations in existing studies have been conducted using ultrasonography (US). This study aimed to describe the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings, progression of ventricular asymmetry, and perinatal outcomes in fetuses prenatally diagnosed with isolated ventricular asymmetry. METHODS: This retrospective study included patients who underwent MRI for isolated fetal ventricular asymmetry at a tertiary center between January 2012 and January 2020. Information, including pregnancy history, US, MRI findings, and perinatal outcomes, was obtained from medical records. RESULTS: The study cohort included 17 women with fetal ventricular asymmetry but without ventriculomegaly at the time of index US. Mild ventriculomegaly subsequently developed in 13 patients; 12 of them showed spontaneous resolution before delivery. MRI identified low-grade intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) in 13 fetuses. Postnatally, 12 newborns underwent neonatal cranial US where two of them showed evidence of germinal matrix hemorrhage. Both newborns appeared normal at birth without neonatal complications. CONCLUSION: MRI identified low-grade IVH in most fetuses with isolated ventricular asymmetry. These fetuses were also likely to develop mild ventriculomegaly with spontaneous resolution. Although perinatal outcomes appeared good, careful follow-up in both prenatal and postnatal periods is warranted.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".