ArticleCureus2024
Unveiling Nasal Glial Heterotopia: A Pathological Perspective.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Amniotic membrane scaffold in conjunction with Biodentine for apexification: a clinical study on immature permanent teeth.BMC research notes · 2026Article
- A case of large oropharyngeal glial heterotopia causing airway obstruction in a newborn: A case report and brief review of literature.International journal of surgery case reports · 2025Article
- Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The uncommon, non-hereditary congenital abnormalities known as nasal glial heterotopias (NGH) are composed of heterotopic neuroglial tissue. Typically, NGH manifests in infancy, but occasionally it can also be seen in older children and adults. To rule out intracranial extension, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) scans should be performed. Numerous cases have been documented where NGH was mistakenly identified as encephaloceles, teratomas, dermoid cysts, capillary haemangiomas, and even desmoids. A proper clinical, sonological, and even CT and MRI evaluation can lead to a near-final diagnosis; nonetheless, surgical excision and histological confirmation are the gold standards. We report a rare case of a firm, subcutaneous, non-tender, non-reducible midline 2 x 2 x 1 cm swelling with bluish-red skin near the root of the nose that was not affected by posture or pressure. Encephalocele, NGH, and dermoid were the differential diagnoses made based on the oedema found on CT and MRI scans. Histopathology provided a conclusive NGH diagnosis. The instance illustrates the significance of histology as the gold standard for NGH diagnosis.
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.