How to Explore Fetal Sacral Agenesis Without Open Dysraphism: Key Prenatal Imaging and Clinical Implications
Authors: Nicolas Mottet
Célia Cretolle
Francine Arbez-Gindre
Frederic Auber
Yann Chaussy
Didier Riethmuller
Fabien Guimiot
Alexandra Benachi
Journal: Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine (2018)
Discipline: CLINICAL MEDICINE
Keywords: Currarino syndrome; obstetrics (detailed fetal anatomy); obstetrics (second trimester); sacral agenesis; spinal dysraphism
Affiliations: Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Jean Minjoz Besançon University Hospital, Université de Franche Comté, Besançon, France., Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital Antoine Béclère, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Université Paris Sud, Paris, France., Department of Pediatric Surgery, Jean Minjoz Besançon University Hospital, Université de Franche Comté, Besançon, France., Department of Developmental Biology, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Robert Debré Hospital, Denis Diderot University, Paris, France., Unit of Fetal Pathology, Jean Minjoz Besançon University Hospital, Université de Franche Comté, Besançon, France., National Reference Centre for Rare Diseases on Anorectal Malformations and Rare Pelvic Anomalies, Necker-Enfants Malades Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Université René Descartes, Paris, France.

Abstract:  The estimated prevalence of fetal caudal dysgenesis is 1 per 100,000 births. The functional prognosis of sacral agenesis is dominated by the large spectrum of associated caudal malformations. Except for cases associated with hydrocephalus secondary to open spinal dysraphism or chromosomal anomalies, association with mental deficiency is rare. We propose a systematic prenatal approach to cases of fetal sacral agenesis based on 9 etiologic items: clinical context, type of sacral dysgenesis, associated spinal cord malformations, mobility of lower limbs, investigation of the presacral region, analysis of the gastrointestinal tract, analysis of the genitourinary tract, associated vertebral defects, and cytogenetic analysis. 

Retracted: No

PubPeer comments:
 This 2016 paper got silently  withdrawn today by the publisher, after Nick Brown wrote about it on his blog post: https: steamtraen.blogspot.com 2020 04 some-issues-in-recent-gaming-research.html It appears to have been withdrawn in the last couple of days. According to the Elsevier policy,  withdrawn is a term that is used for recent papers that have not yet been assigned to an issue number. However, this paper was published online in 2016, and assigned to the 2017 10(1) issue of Sleep Science as according to this screenshot of a recently downloaded copy of the paper: ![file] The Withdrawal Statement says:  This article has been withdrawn based on a publication error. The Publisher apologizes for any inconvenience this may cause. , 
 To clarify: this PubPeer entry refers to the April 2020  withdrawal statement of a 2016 paper with the original DOI of 10.5935 1984-0063.20170007 - see https: pubpeer.com publications 4C9ED25D4E435F4D34CA8DF94A0FD3 As of today, the afternoon of April 23, this number gives  DOI Not Found error. , 
 #2 I suspect that *this* DOI is the original one, dating to the acceptance of the manuscript in 2016, when Elsevier were the publisher of the journal. Then in 2017 the Brazilian Sleep Society resumed publication of the journal, and presumably that is when they issued the duplicate DOI 10.5935 1984-0063.20170007. Whether they ever officially **registered** that DOI is a moot point. , 
 Thank you Hoya. So it seems the paper has two different DOI s and was not withdrawn recently, as initially suspected, but already in 2016. It then got published later, in the same journal , with the same submission and acceptance dates. The confusion is caused because the same paper has two different DOIs, one of which was withdrawn, and the other one still being untouched. ,