ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2026
Case Report: Two neonatal cases of genetically confirmed junctional epidermolysis bullosa in a tertiary care center.
Article in Frontiers in 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Epidermolysis bullosa (EB) comprises a group of genetically heterogeneous disorders caused by defects in proteins responsible for dermoepidermal adhesion. Severe forms frequently present in the neonatal period and may be associated with early extracutaneous involvement, reflecting the widespread expression of these structural proteins beyond the skin. Case presentation: We report two term neonates presenting at birth with extensive mucocutaneous blistering. The first neonate demonstrated congenital skin fragility associated with radiologic evidence of pyloric atresia. Surgical correction was performed, and genetic testing was conducted to clarify the underlying subtype. The second neonate developed rapidly progressive blistering with nail involvement, mucosal lesions, and electrolyte disturbance. A molecular analysis by whole-exome sequencing identified biallelic pathogenic truncating variants in LAMB3 (c.3043C>T [p.Gln1015*] and c.3247C>T [p.Gln1083*]), confirming autosomal-recessive junctional EB. Early genetic evaluation allowed for precise subtype classification and informed multidisciplinary management and family counseling. Discussion: These cases highlight several important aspects of neonatal care. Early extracutaneous manifestations, particularly gastrointestinal and urogenital involvement, should raise suspicion for integrin- and laminin-related EB subtypes. Prompt genetic testing is essential in the neonatal period to distinguish between clinically overlapping EB phenotypes, refine the prognosis, and guide anticipatory management. Supportive care requires significant modification to routine neonatal practices, including atraumatic handling, specialized wound and mucosal care, nutritional optimization, and close surveillance for systemic complications. The identified mutations further contribute to emerging genotype-phenotype correlations in severe EB. Conclusion: Severe EB presenting at birth represents a life-threatening multisystem disorder rather than an isolated skin disease. Early genetic diagnosis is essential for accurate classification, prognosis, and family counseling. Detailed neonatal case reports with molecular characterization contribute to improved clinical recognition and understanding of genotype-phenotype correlations in EB.
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.