ArticleClinical and experimental pediatrics2026
Sacral dimple: clinical perspectives of lesions hidden beneath the skin.
Article in Clinical and experimental pediatrics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sacral dimples are the most common cutaneous anomalies in newborns. While usually benign anatomical variants, some dimples are indicative of occult spinal dysraphism, such as a tethered cord, dermal sinus tract, or lipomyelomeningocele, that, if undiagnosed, may cause irreversible neurological, orthopedic, and urological deficits. Distinguishing benign from high-risk dimples is essential for timely intervention. This review summarizes the embryological origins, diagnostic criteria, imaging approaches, and management strategies for sacral dimples to help clinicians identify cases requiring further evaluation. A comprehensive literature review examines the embryology of caudal spinal development, classification of spinal dysraphism, and studies of the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in infants with sacral dimples. Guidelines and high-quality studies of the surgical outcomes of tethered cords and related anomalies were also analyzed. The literature search and study selection followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta- Analyses flow. Simple sacral dimples-solitary midline depressions less than 5 mm in diameter, located within 2.5 cm of the anus, and lacking associated cutaneous stigmata-are not associated with spinal dysraphism and do not require imaging. In contrast, atypical dimples (large, deep, off-midline, or associated with skin markers such as hair tufts or hemangiomas) are significantly associated with occult anomalies and warrant imaging, beginning with spinal ultrasonography in neonates and MRI in older infants or equivocal cases. Conditions such as tethered cord, dermal sinus tract, lipomyelomeningocele, and split cord malformations are best visualized using MRI. Early surgical detethering improves neurological, orthopedic, and bladder outcomes, whereas delayed intervention risks permanent deficits. Applying standardized criteria and targeted imaging avoids unnecessary investigations while ensuring a timely diagnosis of occult spinal dysraphism. Early recognition and appropriate surgical management, when indicated, are critical for preventing neurological deterioration and improving the prognosis of affected infants.
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.