ArticleInternational ophthalmology2020
Ophthalmic features and management outcomes of 30 children having Goldenhar syndrome.
Article in International ophthalmology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Goldenhar Syndrome-Embryological, Anatomical, Etiopathogenic Mechanisms and Treatment of Obstructive Sleep Apnea.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- A Rare Cheek Sinus Presentation of a Type II First Branchial Cleft Anomaly: A Case Report and Literature Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Ocular Manifestations and Pathological Features in Goldenhar Syndrome: A 10-Year Retrospective Study.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2025Article
- Case report: A novel intronicFrontiers in genetics · 2025Article
- Clinicopathological characteristics of ocular surface squamous neoplasia: a 10-year review form a referral tertiary centre in Nigeria.International ophthalmology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo study the ophthalmic clinical profile and the management outcomes of children having Goldenhar syndrome (GS).
methodsRetrospective review of included children fulfilling the diagnostic criteria of GS was performed. The demography, ophthalmic features, systemic anomalies, and treatment outcomes were recorded manually from patient files. An ENT, pediatrics, cardiology, and orthopedics consultation was sought for all GS patients before taking up for any ophthalmic surgical procedure. The anatomical (ocular surface and eyelid) and functional {vision and extraocular movements (EOM)} factors were exclusively studied. We ensured a minimum postoperative follow-up of 12 months, and our data were compared with the major studies featuring 'ophthalmic features' of GS.
resultsTotally 30 children (females = 18, 60%) were included with a median presenting age of 48 months. Twenty-seven (90%) had unilateral ophthalmic involvement with major features being upper eyelid coloboma (n = 25, 75.76%), lipodermoid (n = 18, 54.55%), and limbal dermoid (n = 10, 30.3%). Diminution of visual acuity was recorded in 22 (73.3%), while five (16.7%) had limitation of EOM. Systemically, the prominent features included hemifacial hypotrophy (100%), auricular anomalies (80%), cardiac anomalies (10%), and scoliosis (6.67%). The eyelid colobomas were repaired with the direct closure ± cantholysis technique or using a Tenzel's flap. All children had satisfactory anatomical and functional outcomes after ophthalmic surgical interventions without any significant complications.
conclusionThe tailored ophthalmic surgical intervention(s) provides satisfactory restoration of anatomy and functionality of the eye. These children need specific multi-discipline consultations for the holistic management and complete care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31760545What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.