ArticleClinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology2021
Three Cases of Bilateral Breast Absence Associated with Familial Congenital Ectodermal Defects.
Article in Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genetic Variants inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Compliant, Tough, Anti-Fatigue, Self-Recovery, and Biocompatible PHEMA-Based Hydrogels for Breast Tissue Replacement Enabled by Hydrogen Bonding Enhancement and Suppressed Phase Separation.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to analyze three cases of bilateral breast absence associated with congenital ectodermal defects in the same family to identify a suitable clinical treatment plan.
methodsThree patients (case 1 and case 2 are a brother-sister relationship; case 3 is their father) complained of the absence of breasts, nipples, and areolas, accompanied by deformity of facial features and fingers; all other clinical indexes were normal. Case 1 first underwent bilateral papillary reconstruction, with areola embroidery carried out six months later. Case 2 first underwent prosthetic breast augmentation, and after ten months, she underwent nipple reconstruction and auricular cartilage, silica gel prosthesis rhinoplasty, epicanthus correction, and areola embroidery. Gene tests were carried out for both cases. Case 3 did not undergo any surgical procedures.
resultsThe operations achieved good results, although in case 2, the reconstructed nipples retracted and became smaller. Neither of the subjects had adverse reactions after the procedures. A heterozygous mutation of the KCTD1 gene c.2020A>T (p.i674f), a mutation inherited from case 3 (their father), was detected through gene analysis. Copy number analysis and single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) analysis were carried out, but no copy number variation possibly related to clinical manifestations was detected.
conclusionThe bilateral breast absence associated with familial congenital ectodermal defects in cases 1 and 2 were found to be induced by a heterozygous mutation of the KCTD1 gene c.2020A>T (p.i674f) inherited from case 3 (their father). Two of the three cases underwent surgical treatment, and good clinical results were achieved.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.