Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35567628›Full record

SynthesisPediatric surgery international2022

Heteropagus twins: six cases with systematic review and embryological insights.

Praveen Mathur, Shilpa Sharma, Priyanka Mittal, Raj Kumar Yadav, Dinesh Barolia

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Pediatric surgery international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Praveen MathurDepartment of Pediatric Surgery, SMS Medical College, Jaipur, Rajasthan, 302004, India.
Shilpa SharmaDepartment of Pediatric Surgery, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Priyanka MittalDepartment of Pediatric Surgery, SMS Medical College, Jaipur, Rajasthan, 302004, India. priyanka1986mittal@gmail.com.
Raj Kumar YadavDepartment of Radiodiagnosis, SMS Medical College, Jaipur, India.
Dinesh BaroliaDepartment of Pediatric Surgery, SMS Medical College, Jaipur, Rajasthan, 302004, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeHeteropagus twinning (HT) is a rare anomaly. Six new cases along with a systematic review are described.

methodsSix cases of HT managed at two tertiary care teaching hospitals over the last 26 years are described. A PubMed search with words: Heteropagus AND/ OR parasitic twins from 2001 to 2021 hit 183 articles. 36 were added from non-PubMed sources. Finally, 120 cases including 114 from 69 articles and 6 new cases were analysed.

resultsOf the new cases, 2/6 had an antenatal diagnosis. Five were males. 4 autosites had omphaloceles. Split notochord and 2 parasites attached to a single autosite were encountered. 5/6 autosites survived. On systematic review, the most frequent variant seen was rachipagus (n = 50) followed by omphalopagus (n = 46). Limbs were reported in 75 cases. Congenital heart disease was seen in 17/120(14.2%) autosites. Omphalocele and meningomyelocele were the most common extracardiac anomalies in autosites. Weight along with the anatomy and position of heteropagus twins was a better determinant of the mode of delivery than weight alone. Mortality was reported in 12 cases.

conclusionAutosites in HT generally carry a good prognosis, however, final outcome depends mainly on associated major cardiac anomalies. Meticulous antenatal assessment and preoperative planning are of paramount importance. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Indexed as

Heart Defects, CongenitalHernia, UmbilicalTwins, ConjoinedFemaleHumansMalePregnancyPrenatal DiagnosisAutositeHeteropagus twinsOmphalopagusParasitic twinsRachipagus

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.