Submited on: 07 May 2013 10:43:53 PM GMT
Published on: 08 May 2013 10:33:59 AM GMT
 

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    Nothing was claimed. 


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    It's review article, Novelity of article is not claimed by authors.


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    The review article is well summerized in the context of previous published articles.


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    It's review article, hence No result was expected. Conclusions by authors are acceptable.


  • If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?

    It's review article


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?

    It's review article wherein summerized methododology with photograph is given by authors


  • Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?

    Sufficient informations relevant to topic of review have been incorporated by authors.

    yes these online articles must have throughly read and incorporated for refining this review article

    http://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs/37628/InTech-Prenatal_evaluation_of_fetuses_presenting_with_short_femurs.pdf

    http://radiographics.rsna.com/content/24/1/157.full

    http://www.sonoworld.com/Client/Fetus/html/chapter-09/skeleton.html

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3279100/

    http://www.hindawi.com/isrn/obgyn/2012/268218/

    1. Chaddha, V. and Kapoor, N. (2010). Fetal Skeletal System. Donald School Journal of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 4(4):391-403392
    2. Richard A. Bowerman, R.A. (1995). Anomalies of the Fetal Skeleton: Sonographic Findings. AJR 1995, 164: 973-979.
    3. Ermito,S.,  Dinatale, A.,  Carrara, S., Cavaliere, A., Imbruglia, L.and Recupero, S. (2009). Prenatal diagnosis of limb abnormalities: role of fetal ultrasonography. J Prenat Med. 2009 Apr-Jun; 3(2): 18–22.
    4. Fong, K.W., Toi, A., Salem, S., Hornberger, L.K., Chitayat, K., Keating, S.J., McAuliffe, F. and Johnson, J.A. (2004). Detection of Fetal Structural Abnormalities with US during Early Pregnancy. RadioGraphics, 24, 157-174. doi: 10.1148/rg.241035027 January 2004
    5. Pamela A. Mahon, Cyrus Cooper, Sarah R. Crozier and Keith M. Godfrey (2009). The use of 3D ultrasound to investigate fetal bone development. Norsk Epidemiologi 2009; 19 (1): 45-52
    6. José Morales-Roselló and Núria Peralta LLorens (2012). Clinical StudyOutcome of Fetuses with Diagnosis of Isolated Short Femur in the Second Half of Pregnancy, SRN Obstetrics and Gynecology Volume 2012 (2012), Article ID 268218, 5 pages, doi:10.5402/2012/268218


  • Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?

    No


  • Other Comments:

    Authors have presented this review article in well summerized formate but following articles must have been read and incorporated in review

    1. Chaddha, V. and Kapoor, N. (2010). Fetal Skeletal System. Donald School Journal of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 4(4):391-403392
    2. Richard A. Bowerman, R.A. (1995). Anomalies of the Fetal Skeleton: Sonographic Findings. AJR 1995, 164: 973-979.
    3. Ermito,S.,  Dinatale, A.,  Carrara, S., Cavaliere, A., Imbruglia, L.and Recupero, S. (2009). Prenatal diagnosis of limb abnormalities: role of fetal ultrasonography. J Prenat Med. 2009 Apr-Jun; 3(2): 18–22.
    4. Fong, K.W., Toi, A., Salem, S., Hornberger, L.K., Chitayat, K., Keating, S.J., McAuliffe, F. and Johnson, J.A. (2004). Detection of Fetal Structural Abnormalities with US during Early Pregnancy. RadioGraphics, 24, 157-174. doi: 10.1148/rg.241035027 January 2004
    5. Pamela A. Mahon, Cyrus Cooper, Sarah R. Crozier and Keith M. Godfrey (2009). The use of 3D ultrasound to investigate fetal bone development. Norsk Epidemiologi 2009; 19 (1): 45-52
    5. José Morales-Roselló and Núria Peralta LLorens (2012). Clinical StudyOutcome of Fetuses with Diagnosis of Isolated Short Femur in the Second Half of Pregnancy, SRN Obstetrics and Gynecology Volume 2012 (2012), Article ID 268218, 5 pages, doi:10.5402/2012/268218

    http://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs/37628/InTech-Prenatal_evaluation_of_fetuses_presenting_with_short_femurs.pdf

    http://radiographics.rsna.com/content/24/1/157.full

    http://www.sonoworld.com/Client/Fetus/html/chapter-09/skeleton.html

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3279100/

    http://www.hindawi.com/isrn/obgyn/2012/268218/

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:

    No

  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    I am working as researcher and teacher in this subject

  • How to cite:  Sharma S .Review on Lenght Measurement of Fetal Long Bone and Fetal Anomaly Detectation[Review of the article 'Length Measurement of Fetal Long Bone and Fetal Anomaly Detection ' by Jeon D].WebmedCentral 2013;4(5):WMCRW002722
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    The authors have comprehensively summarized the role of measuring long bone measurement specifically femur length for estimating accurate gestation age,weight but more importantly for abnormal fetal development like osteochondrodysplasias.Although most of utrasonographic measures are helpful in predicting the lethal skeletal dysplasias they are nit helpful in picking up the accurate diagnosis and the authors suggest genetics test at molecular level to confirm the diagnosis althoughg once one has got thge desired outcome in predicting the desired skeletal dysplasia and termination of pregnancy is achieved at correct time that is only for academic purposes and for prevention purposes in future and with recent CT pick up being more accurate maybe it would be justified to do that investigation after suspicion on routine usg rather than submitting all fetuses to CT.


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    No

    1. Guzman-Huerta ME,Morales AS,Benavides-Serralde A,Camargo-Marin L,Velazquez-Torres B et al.Prenatal prevalence of skeletal dysplasias and a proposal ultrasonographic diagnosis approach Rev Invest Clin 2012;64(5):429-436.
    2. Victoria CD,Epelman M,Coleman BG,Horii S,Oliver ER,Mahboubi S,Khalek N,Kasperski S,Edgar JC,JaramilloD.Low dose fetal CT in the prenatal evaluation of skeletal dysplasia s and other severe skeletal Abnormalities.AJR Am J Roentgenol 2013;200(5):989-1000.
    3. Miyazaki O,Nishimura G,Sago H,Horiuchi T,Kosaki R.Prenatal diagnosis of fetalskeleton dysplasia with3D CT.Pediatr Radiol 2012;42(7):842-852.
    4. Bober MB,Taylor M,Heinle R,Mackenzie W.Achondroplasia-hypochondroplasiacomplex and abnormal pulmonary anatomy.Am J Med Genet A 2012;158A(9):2336-2341.
    5. Chen CP,Chen CY,Chem SR,SuJW,Wang W.First trimester prenatal diagnosis of ELLIS-vanCreveld syndrome.Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 2012;51(4):643-648. Both latter studies involving genetic studies of particular syndrome.


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    Yes


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    Yes it is a review very comprehensively written with initially explaining the measurements of femur and tibia and time of epiphysis and diaphysis appearing and the significance of ethnicity,sex,iugr,individual variations and only over 2SD smaller femur signifies measuring other long bones like tibie,humerus,ulna and a nice description provided with mportant skeletal dysplasias with thanatiphoric dysplasia tyoe I and II ,achondroplasia,osteogenesis imperf4cta with 7 types with blue sclera and  the importance of testing the genetics although once a correct outcome has been got that is timing of termination of pregnancy it maybe only of academic importance and only where molecular testing is possible it is justified itherwise for developing countries it maybe only of academic importance epecially wher ost factor matters.


  • If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?

    It is a review.


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?

    It is a review article comprehensively written and well explaining how norma long bone measurements are taken with illustrations.


  • Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?

    The author has alteady provided illustrations,but they should include the role of CT in case of doubt on ultrasonography otherwise it is a well written review.


  • Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?

    No recently with the availability of 3DCT one can rule out these abnormalities without the correct diagnosis although for perfect diagnosis one needs a molecular diagnosis but for practical purposers one doesnt need a molecular diagnosisand one can reminate the preganancy just with the availability of a FL smaller than 4SD.


  • Other Comments:

    Besides other molecular mechanisms FGFR2 deficiency can be responsible for these bent bones and that occurs due to missense mutations in FGFR2 and causes no mineralization in chondrocytes and leads to bent bone dysplasias.

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    yes, I have been managing antenatal cases since 1984since my MD days although now i only manage high risk obstetrics only of my infertile couples conceived with whatever medical disorder.

  • How to cite:  Kaur K K.Review on length Measurement of Fetal Long Bone and Fetal Anomaly Detection [Review of the article 'Length Measurement of Fetal Long Bone and Fetal Anomaly Detection ' by Jeon D].WebmedCentral 2013;4(5):WMCRW002720
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    No real claims


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    Not applicable as no real claims. There are several published review articles on fetal long bone measurements and skeletal dysplasias


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    Not applicable


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    Not applicable. Not a research study.


  • If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?

    Not applicable


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?

    Not applicable.


  • Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?

    The review is poorly written. A thorough systematic meta-analysis of published literature would strengthen the article.


  • Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?

    No


  • Other Comments:

    The article would not be suitable for publication and unlikely to generate any interest. Also, I do not find this useful for clinicians.

  • Competing interests:
    0
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    I am a consultant obstetrician and gynecologist with special interest in fetal medicine and actively involved in obstetric ultrasound. Also published in obstetric ultrasound.

  • How to cite:  Venkat Raman N .Length Measurement of Fetal Long Bone and Fetal Anomaly Detection[Review of the article 'Length Measurement of Fetal Long Bone and Fetal Anomaly Detection ' by Jeon D].WebmedCentral 2013;4(5):WMCRW002745
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Opnion Report
Posted by Dr. Mohammad Othman on 06 May 2013 02:32:31 PM GMT

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    No claims it is just putting the part of the facts the author want the reader to be convenced of it.


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    No not novel and loads of authors who study fetal ultrasound wrote on the same subject.


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    NA


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    NA


  • If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?

    NA


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?

    NA


  • Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?

    Yes more details would be benificial. a real review or meta-analysis of studies would help strengthen the conclusions.


  • Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?

    No it is the author opinion and this is not proven but needs to be proved.


  • Other Comments:

    NA

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Author and consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist with papers and clinical trials on fetal ultrasound

  • How to cite:  Othman M .Opnion Report[Review of the article 'Length Measurement of Fetal Long Bone and Fetal Anomaly Detection ' by Jeon D].WebmedCentral 2013;4(5):WMCRW002716
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse