Risk for chromosomal aberrations in apparently isolated intrauterine growth restriction: A systematic review

Etiologic evaluation and pregnancy outcomes of fetal growth restriction (FGR) associated with structural malformations

This study aimed to evaluate the etiology and pregnancy outcomes of fetuses underwent invasive prenatal diagnosis for fetal growth restriction (FGR) accompanied by structural malformations. Data from 130 pregnancies referred for prenatal diagnosis for FGR accompanied by structural malformations were obtained between July 2011 and July 2023. Traditional karyotyping was conducted for all the subjects. A total of 37 (28.5%) cases of chromosomal abnormalities were detected by karyotyping, including 30 cases of numerical anomalies and seven cases of unbalanced structural anomalies. Trisomy 18 was the most common abnormalities, accounting for 51.4%, significantly higher than any other chromosomal abnormality. The cohort was predominantly comprised of early-onset FGR (88.5%) compared to late-onset FGR (11.5%). The incidences of chromosomal abnormalities in this two groups were 29.6% (34/115) and 20.0% (3/15), respectively (p > 0.05). The majority (74.6%, 97/130) of the cohort were affected by a single system malformation, with chromosomal abnormalities found in 19.6% (19/97) of cases. In pregnancies of structural malformations involving two and multiple systems, the frequencies were 56.5% (13/23), and 50.0% (5/10), respectively. Single nucleotide polymorphism array (SNP array) was performed in parallel for 65 cases, revealing additional 7.7% cases of copy number variants (CNVs) compared to karyotyping. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was used for detection of cytomegalovirus (CMV) DNA in 92 cases. All fetuses with FGR associated with two or more system malformations were either terminated or stillborn, irrespective of chromosomal aberrations. Conversely, 71.8% of pregnancies with a single-system malformation and normal genetic testing results resulted in live births. Furthermore, two (2.2%) cases tested positive for CMV DNA, leading to one termination and one case of serious developmental disorder after birth. Our study suggests that structural malformations associated with FGR are more likely to affect a single organ system. When multiple systems are involved, the incidence of chromosomal abnormalities and termination rates are notably high. We advocate for the use of CMA and CMV DNA examinations in FGR cases undergo invasive prenatal diagnosis, as these tests can provide valuable insights for etiological exploration and pregnancy management guidance.

Usefulness of angiogenic factors in prenatal counseling of late-onset fetal growth-restricted and small-for-gestational-age gestations: a prospective observational study

OBJECTIVES

To create a predictive model including biomarkers and evaluate its ability to predict adverse perinatal outcomes in late-onset small fetuses, ultimately helping to provide individualized counseling at the time of diagnosis.

METHODS

This was a prospective observational study, including singleton pregnancies with an estimated fetal weight (EFW) below the 10th percentile, at a gestational age between 32 + 0 and 36 + 6 weeks of gestation (WG). Variables recorded at diagnosis to predict adverse pregnancy outcomes were: soluble fms-like tyrosine-kinase-1 to placental growth factor ratio (sFlt-1/PlGF), fetal Doppler (umbilical artery and middle cerebral artery), uterine artery pulsatility index (UtAPI), EFW percentile, gestational age, and the presence of maternal risk factors for placental insufficiency. Logistic regression models were developed for the prediction of three co-primary outcomes: composite adverse perinatal outcomes (APO), and the need for elective delivery before 35 or 37 WG.

RESULTS

Sixty (52.2%) fetal growth restricted (FGR) and 55 (47.8%) small for gestational age (SGA) were enrolled. Thirteen (11.3%) women needed elective delivery before 35 WG and 27 (23.5%) women before 37 WG. At least one APO occurred in 43 (37.4%) pregnancies. The best marker in univariate analyses was the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio [AUC = 0.932 (95% CI, 0.864-0.999)]. The multivariate model including sFlt-1/PlGF showed a better predictive performance for APO than the multivariate model without sFlt-1/PlGF (P < 0.024).

CONCLUSIONS

sFlt-1/PlGF is a good predictor of APO at the time of late-onset FGR/SGA diagnosis. Our predictive models may be useful to provide early individualized prenatal counseling in this group of women. Further studies are needed to validate these preliminary findings in a larger cohort.

Contribution of amniocentesis in fetuses small for gestational age without other sonographic signs

OBJECTIVE

Our study evaluated the contribution of amniocentesis in the diagnostic approach of small-for-gestational-age fetuses (SGA) without morphological abnormality identified on ultrasound by studying FISH (fluorescence in situ hybridization) for chromosomes 13, 18 and 21, CMV PCR (cytomegalovirus polymerase chain reaction), karyotype and CGH (genomic hybridization array) METHODS: Our single-center retrospective cohort study included pregnant women referred for prenatal diagnosis for a SGA fetus in whom amniocentesis was performed between 2016 and 2019. A SGA fetus was defined as a fetus with an estimated fetal weight (EFW) below the 10th percentile according to referral growth curves in use. We evaluated the number of amniocenteses with an abnormal result and identified factors that may be associated with this outcome.

RESULTS

Among the 79 amniocenteses performed, there were 5 (6.3%) abnormalities: karyotype (1.3%) and CGH (5.1%). No complications were described. We did not find any statistically significant factors associated with abnormal amniocentesis findings even if some elements seemed reassuring such as late discovery (p = 0.31), moderate SGA (p = 0.18), normal head, abdomen and femur measurements (p = 0.57), but without statistically significant difference.

CONCLUSION

Our study found 6.3% pathological analysis of amniocenteses, of which several would have been missed by conventional karyotyping. Patients must be informed about the risk of detecting abnormalities of low severity, with low penetrance or with unknown fetal consequences that could be source of anxiety.

Fetal genetic findings by chromosomal microarray analysis and karyotyping for fetal growth restriction without structural malformations at a territory referral center: 10-year experience

BACKGROUND

Prenatal invasive genetic testing is commonly recommended to pregnancies of early-onset FGR or FGR combined with a structural defect. Our study aimed to explore the genetic findings for FGR without structural malformations according to cytogenetic karyotyping and single nucleotide polymorphism array (SNP array) technology over a 10-year period.

METHODS

A total of 488 pregnancies diagnosed with FGR without structural malformation were retrospectively reviewed. Cytogenetic karyotyping was performed on all the subjects, and SNP array was available from 272 of them. Based on the gestational age at onset, the cohort was classified into four groups: ≤ 24, 25-28, 29-32, and > 32 weeks of gestation. According to the ultrasound findings, they were grouped into isolated FGR, FGR with soft markers, and FGR with non-structural anomalies. In pregnancies of young maternal age, based on the results of maternal serum screening (MSS), they were categorized into high-risk and low-risk MSS groups.

RESULTS

Nineteen (3.9%) cases of chromosomal abnormalities were detected by cytogenetic karyotyping, including 11 cases of numerical abnormalities, 5 cases of structural abnormalities, and 3 cases of mosaicism. Trisomy 21 was the most frequent abnormality. Abnormal karyotypes were more frequently observed in cases diagnosed at ≤ 24 weeks (7.2%) than those in any other group. Among pregnancies with normal karyotype, an incremental yield of 4.2% were revealed by SNP array technology regarding clinically relevant aberrations. The additional detection rates by SNP array in cases diagnosed at ≤ 24 weeks (6.5%), cases with soft markers (9.5%), and cases with high-risk MSS (12.0%) were higher than those in other groups within each classification. All the cases with abnormal karyotypes and 7 out of 11 pregnancies with clinically relevant anomalies revealed by SNP array alone resulted in pregnancy terminations.

CONCLUSION

Chromosome abnormality is an important etiology for FGR with no associated structural malformations, and plays a crucial role in pregnancies decision-making. SNP array improves the detection of genetic anomalies especially in FGR diagnosed at ≤ 24 weeks, FGR combined with soft makers, and FGR combined with high-risk MSS.

The Genetic and Clinical Outcomes in Fetuses With Isolated Fetal Growth Restriction: A Chinese Single-Center Retrospective Study

Objective: To evaluate the utility of a chromosomal microarray (CMA) in fetuses with isolated fetal growth restriction (FGR) and explore risk factors for the prediction of chromosomal aberration and perinatal adverse outcomes.

Method: This study included 271 fetuses of estimated fetal weight less than the 3rd percentile without other structural malformation. Early-onset and late-onset FGR were defined as gestational weeks less than 32 weeks and more than 32 weeks respectively. These patients underwent quantitative fluorescent polymerase chain reaction (QF-PCR) and CMA as the first-line genetic detection strategy. Chromosomal anomalies were compared after stratified analysis by the early-onset and the late-onset FGR, including the absence or presence of ultrasound soft markers, abnormal amniotic fluid, abnormal umbilical Doppler, and gestational disorders. The follow-up time was within 1 year after birth. Logistic regression was used to seek risk predictors of chromosomal aberration and perinatal adverse outcomes for isolated FGR.

Results: The CMA identified clinically significant variants in 18/271 (6.6%) fetuses, and variants of unknown significance (VOUS) in 15/271 (5.5%) fetuses. Stratified analysis showed that there was a higher incidence of clinically significant variants in fetuses with the early-onset FGR compared with late-onset FGR (8.7%, 17/195 vs. 1.3%, 1/76, p < 0.05). Regression analysis showed that early gestational age (GA) at diagnosis of FGR was the major risk factor for chromosomal aberration (OR = 0.846). By variable regression analysis, early GA at diagnosis and decreased estimated fetal weight (EFW) percentile of suspicion of FGR, asymmetrical FGR, abnormal amniotic fluid, and severe preeclampsia could all increase the risk of adverse outcomes of isolated FGR including intra-uterine fetal death (IUFD), termination of pregnancy (TOP), and preterm birth in pregnancies with FGR.

Conclusion: This study emphasized the value of microarrays for unbalanced genomic variants in fetuses with isolated FGR, especially since the gestational age of nullipara was less than 32 weeks. Perinatal adverse outcomes of isolated FGR were influenced by multiple factors including GA and estimated fetal weight (EFW) percentile of suspicion of FGR, asymmetrical FGR, abnormal amniotic fluid, and severe preeclampsia.

3q27.1 microdeletion causes prenatal and postnatal growth restriction and neurodevelopmental abnormalities

BACKGROUND

Overlapping microdeletions of chromosome 3q26-3q28 have been reported in eight individuals. The common phenotype observed in these individuals include intrauterine growth restriction, short stature, microcephaly, feeding difficulties, facial dysmorphisms, limb abnormalities and developmental delay. The most striking clinical features shared among all reported cases is prenatal and postnatal growth restriction and neurodevelopmental abnormalities.

CASE PRESENTATION

We identified two additional individuals with overlapping deletions and shared clinical features by high-resolution SNP oligonucleotide microarray, and refined the smallest region of overlap (SRO) to a 1.2 Mb genomic location in chromosome 3q27.1 by reviewing and comparing all published cases. We evaluated the SRO using ACMG/ClinGen current recommendations for classifying copy number variants (CNVs), and discussed the contribution of the genes deleted in the SRO to the abnormal phenotype observed in these individuals.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides further evidence supporting the existence of a novel 3q27.1 microdeletion syndrome and suggests that haploinsufficiency of potential candidate genes, DVL3, AP2M1, and PARL in the SRO in 3q27.1 is responsible for the phenotype.

Prenatal diagnosis of fetal growth restriction with polyhydramnios, etiology and impact on postnatal outcome

To assess the spectrum of different etiologies, the intrauterine course, outcome and possible prognostic markers in prenatally detected fetal growth restriction (FGR) combined with polyhydramnios. Retrospective study of 153 cases with FGR combined with Polyhydramnios diagnosed by prenatal ultrasound over a period of 17 years. Charts were reviewed for ultrasound findings, prenatal and postnatal outcome. All cases were categorized into etiological groups and examined for differences. Five etiological groups were identified: chromosomal anomalies (n = 64, 41.8%), complex malformation syndromes (n = 37, 24.1%), isolated malformations (n = 24, 15.7%), musculoskeletal disorders (n = 14, 9.2%) and prenatal non-anomalous fetuses (n = 14, 9.2%). Subgroups showed significant disparities in initial diagnosis of combination of both pathologies, Ratio AFI/ gestational weeks and Doppler ultrasound examinations. Overall mortality rate was 64.7%. Fetuses prenatally assigned to be non-anomalous, showed further complications in 42.9% (n = 6). Fetuses prenatally diagnosed with FGR combined with polyhydramnios are affected by a high morbidity and mortality. Five etiologic groups can be differentiated, showing significant disparities in prenatal and postnatal outcome. Even without recognizable patterns prenatally, long-term-follow up is necessary, as neurodevelopmental or growth delay may occur.

Genetic Background of Fetal Growth Restriction

Fetal growth restriction (FGR) is one of the most formidable challenges in present-day antenatal care. Pathological fetal growth is a well-known factor of not only in utero demise in the third trimester, but also postnatal morbidity and unfavorable developmental outcomes, including long-term sequalae such as metabolic diseases, diabetic mellitus or hypertension. In this review, the authors present the current state of knowledge about the genetic disturbances responsible for FGR diagnosis, divided into fetal, placental and maternal causes (including preeclampsia), as well as their impact on prenatal diagnostics, with particular attention on chromosomal microarray (CMA) and noninvasive prenatal testing technique (NIPT).

Should prenatal chromosomal microarray analysis be offered for isolated fetal growth restriction? A French multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Compared with standard karyotype, chromosomal microarray analysis improves the detection of genetic anomalies and is thus recommended in many prenatal indications. However, evidence is still lacking on the clinical utility of chromosomal microarray analysis in cases of isolated fetal growth restriction.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to estimate the proportion of copy number variants detected by chromosomal microarray analysis and the incremental yield of chromosomal microarray analysis compared with karyotype in the detection of genetic abnormalities in fetuses with isolated fetal growth restriction.

STUDY DESIGN

This retrospective study included all singleton fetuses diagnosed with fetal growth restriction and no structural ultrasound anomalies and referred to 13 French fetal medicine centers over 1 year in 2016. Fetal growth restriction was defined as an estimated fetal weight of <tenth percentile for gestational age identified in ultrasound reports. For this analysis, we selected fetuses who underwent invasive genetic testing with karyotype and chromosomal microarray analysis results. Data were obtained from medical records and ultrasound databases and postmortem and placental examination reports in case of spontaneous stillbirths and terminations of pregnancy. Following the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics guidelines, copy number variants were classified into 5 groups as following: pathogenic, likely pathogenic, variant of unknown significance, likely benign, and benign.

RESULTS

Of 682 referred fetuses diagnosed with isolated fetal growth restriction, both karyotype and chromosomal microarray analysis were performed in 146 fetuses. Overall, the detection rate of genetic anomalies found by chromosomal microarray analysis was estimated to be 7.5% (11 of 146 [95% confidence interval, 3.3-11.8]), including 10 copy number variants classified as pathogenic and 1 copy number variant classified as likely pathogenic. Among the 139 fetuses with normal karyotype, 5 were detected with pathogenic and likely pathogenic copy number variants, resulting in an incremental yield of 3.6% (95% confidence interval, 0.5-6.6) in chromosomal microarray analysis compared with karyotype. All fetuses detected with pathogenic or likely pathogenic copy number variants resulted in terminations of pregnancy. In addition, 3 fetuses with normal karyotype were detected with a variant of unknown significance (2.1%). Among the 7 fetuses with abnormal karyotype, chromosomal microarray analysis did not detect trisomy 18 mosaicism in all fetuses.

CONCLUSION

Our study found that compared with karyotype, chromosomal microarray analysis improves the detection of genetic anomalies in fetuses diagnosed with isolated fetal growth restriction. These results support the use of chromosomal microarray analysis in addition to karyotype for isolated fetal growth restriction.

Severe early-onset fetal growth restriction: What do we tell the prospective parents?

Fetal growth restriction (FGR) is a common complication of pregnancy, associated with higher risk of perinatal mortality and adverse health and developmental outcomes for surviving infants. True FGR relates to a pathological restriction of fetal growth resulting from complex interactions between maternal, placental, fetal, and environmental factors. Early-onset FGR (onset <32 weeks' gestation) is often first suspected at routine mid-trimester sonographic assessment of fetal morphology, or identified as part of the placental syndrome, commonly maternal pre-eclampsia. Prenatal investigations may identify the cause of FGR. Timing of delivery is guided by serial sonographic surveillance of fetal growth and well-being and maternal condition, balancing the risk of stillbirth with the benefits of advancing gestation. This is particularly pertinent to severe early-onset FGR, a leading iatrogenic cause of very preterm birth. Prognosis is largely determined by the severity of FGR and its causes, gestation at birth, and birthweight. Pregnancy termination may be considered. Antenatal care and delivery in a tertiary center, provided by a multi-disciplinary team with expertise in managing high-risk pregnancies, are imperative to optimizing outcomes.

FIGO (international Federation of Gynecology and obstetrics) initiative on fetal growth: best practice advice for screening, diagnosis, and management of fetal growth restriction

Fetal growth restriction (FGR) is defined as the failure of the fetus to meet its growth potential due to a pathological factor, most commonly placental dysfunction. Worldwide, FGR is a leading cause of stillbirth, neonatal mortality, and short- and long-term morbidity. Ongoing advances in clinical care, especially in definitions, diagnosis, and management of FGR, require efforts to effectively translate these changes to the wide range of obstetric care providers. This article highlights agreements based on current research in the diagnosis and management of FGR, and the areas that need more research to provide further clarification of recommendations. The purpose of this article is to provide a comprehensive summary of available evidence along with practical recommendations concerning the care of pregnancies at risk of or complicated by FGR, with the overall goal to decrease the risk of stillbirth and neonatal mortality and morbidity associated with this condition. To achieve these goals, FIGO (the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics) brought together international experts to review and summarize current knowledge of FGR. This summary is directed at multiple stakeholders, including healthcare providers, healthcare delivery organizations and providers, FIGO member societies, and professional organizations. Recognizing the variation in the resources and expertise available for the management of FGR in different countries or regions, this article attempts to take into consideration the unique aspects of antenatal care in low-resource settings (labelled “LRS” in the recommendations). This was achieved by collaboration with authors and FIGO member societies from low-resource settings such as India, Sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America.

Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Consult Series #52: Diagnosis and management of fetal growth restriction: (Replaces Clinical Guideline Number 3, April 2012)

Fetal growth restriction can result from a variety of maternal, fetal, and placental conditions. It occurs in up to 10% of pregnancies and is a leading cause of infant morbidity and mortality. This complex obstetrical problem has disparate published diagnostic criteria, relatively low detection rates, and limited preventative and treatment options. The purpose of this Consult is to outline an evidence-based, standardized approach for the prenatal diagnosis and management of fetal growth restriction. The recommendations of the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine are as follows: (1) we recommend that fetal growth restriction be defined as an ultrasonographic estimated fetal weight or abdominal circumference below the 10th percentile for gestational age (GRADE 1B); (2) we recommend the use of population-based fetal growth references (such as Hadlock) in determining fetal weight percentiles (GRADE 1B); (3) we recommend against the use of low-molecular-weight heparin for the sole indication of prevention of recurrent fetal growth restriction (GRADE 1B); (4) we recommend against the use of sildenafil or activity restriction for in utero treatment of fetal growth restriction (GRADE 1B); (5) we recommend that a detailed obstetrical ultrasound examination (current procedural terminology code 76811) be performed with early-onset fetal growth restriction (<32 weeks of gestation) (GRADE 1B); (6) we recommend that women be offered fetal diagnostic testing, including chromosomal microarray analysis, when fetal growth restriction is detected and a fetal malformation, polyhydramnios, or both are also present regardless of gestational age (GRADE 1B); (7) we recommend that pregnant women be offered prenatal diagnostic testing with chromosomal microarray analysis when unexplained isolated fetal growth restriction is diagnosed at <32 weeks of gestation (GRADE 1C); (8) we recommend against screening for toxoplasmosis, rubella, or herpes in pregnancies with fetal growth restriction in the absence of other risk factors and recommend polymerase chain reaction for cytomegalovirus in women with unexplained fetal growth restriction who elect diagnostic testing with amniocentesis (GRADE 1C); (9) we recommend that once fetal growth restriction is diagnosed, serial umbilical artery Doppler assessment should be performed to assess for deterioration (GRADE 1C); (10) with decreased end-diastolic velocity (ie, flow ratios greater than the 95th percentile) or in pregnancies with severe fetal growth restriction (estimated fetal weight less than the third percentile), we suggest weekly umbilical artery Doppler evaluation (GRADE 2C); (11) we recommend Doppler assessment up to 2-3 times per week when umbilical artery absent end-diastolic velocity is detected (GRADE 1C); (12) in the setting of reversed end-diastolic velocity, we suggest hospitalization, administration of antenatal corticosteroids, heightened surveillance with cardiotocography at least 1-2 times per day, and consideration of delivery depending on the entire clinical picture and results of additional evaluation of fetal well-being (GRADE 2C); (13) we suggest that Doppler assessment of the ductus venosus, middle cerebral artery, or uterine artery not be used for routine clinical management of early- or late-onset fetal growth restriction (GRADE 2B); (14) we suggest weekly cardiotocography testing after viability for fetal growth restriction without absent/reversed end-diastolic velocity and that the frequency be increased when fetal growth restriction is complicated by absent/reversed end-diastolic velocity or other comorbidities or risk factors (GRADE 2C); (15) we recommend delivery at 37 weeks of gestation in pregnancies with fetal growth restriction and an umbilical artery Doppler waveform with decreased diastolic flow but without absent/reversed end-diastolic velocity or with severe fetal growth restriction with estimated fetal weight less than the third percentile (GRADE 1B); (16) we recommend delivery at 33-34 weeks of gestation for pregnancies with fetal growth restriction and absent end-diastolic velocity (GRADE 1B); (17) we recommend delivery at 30-32 weeks of gestation for pregnancies with fetal growth restriction and reversed end-diastolic velocity (GRADE 1B); (18) we suggest delivery at 38-39 weeks of gestation with fetal growth restriction when the estimated fetal weight is between the 3rd and 10th percentile and the umbilical artery Doppler is normal (GRADE 2C); (19) we suggest that for pregnancies with fetal growth restriction complicated by absent/reversed end-diastolic velocity, cesarean delivery should be considered based on the entire clinical scenario (GRADE 2C); (20) we recommend the use of antenatal corticosteroids if delivery is anticipated before 33 6/7 weeks of gestation or for pregnancies between 34 0/7 and 36 6/7 weeks of gestation in women without contraindications who are at risk of preterm delivery within 7 days and who have not received a prior course of antenatal corticosteroids (GRADE 1A); and (21) we recommend intrapartum magnesium sulfate for fetal and neonatal neuroprotection for women with pregnancies that are <32 weeks of gestation (GRADE 1A).

Genetic syndromes associated with isolated fetal growth restriction

Early onset fetal growth restriction (FGR) may be due to impaired placentation, environmental or toxic exposure, congenital infections or genetic abnormalities. Remarkable research, mainly based on retrospective series, has been published on the diverse genetic causes. Those have become more and more relevant with the improvement in the accuracy of the analysis techniques and the rising of breakthrough genomewide methods such as the whole genome sequencing. However, no publication has presented an integrated view of management of those fetuses with an early and severe affection. In this review, we explored to which extent genetic syndromes can cause FGR fetuses without structural defects. The most common chromosomal abnormalities (Triploidies and Trisomy 18), submicroscopic chromosomal anomalies (22q11.2 microduplication syndrome) and single gene disorders (often associated with mild ultrasound findings) related to early and severe FGR had been analysed. Finally, we addressed the impact of epigenetic marks on fetal growth, a matter of growing importance. At the end of this review, we should be able to provide an adequate counseling to parents in terms of diagnosis, prognosis and management of those pregnancies.

Fetal phenotypes emerge as genetic technologies become robust

Prenatal genomic evaluation of the fetus is available at decreasing cost and with a faster turnaround time. However, fetal genotype-phenotype correlations are in their infancy. By comparison, pediatric and adult genotype-phenotype databases are well established and publicly accessible. A similar system for fetal genomics is lacking. When a fetal anomaly is identified by ultrasound imaging, a genetic diagnosis provides important information. However, fetal prognostic counseling is problematic if the only available information is based on outcomes following postnatal diagnoses. The same conditions identified prenatally may have more benign or more deleterious outcomes. Also, the condition may evolve over the pregnancy itself. As genomic testing increasingly examines fetal DNA at a single nucleotide level, the concomitant in utero phenotype deserves equal attention. Often, the reports of fetal phenotype are limited. Among sonologists, an increased awareness of attaining and communicating detailed fetal phenotypes is needed. The interpretation of expanded prenatal sequencing is reliant on deeper fetal phenotyping. The information gained significantly impacts clinical care and understanding of fetal development. This case series highlights: the broad spectrum of fetal phenotypes for known genetic conditions, phenotype progression during pregnancy, and the need to supplement systematic imaging with descriptive details when assessing fetuses with malformations.