ArticleArchives of craniofacial surgery2024
Retrospective data analysis of referral letters for orofacial vascular anomalies to a tertiary center.
Article in Archives of craniofacial surgery, 2024. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVascular anomalies are disorders of the vascular system. These anomalies are classified as either vascular tumors or vascular malformations, with each possessing distinct characteristics. This study was performed to analyze vascular anomaly referrals to a tertiary center, identify patterns of misdiagnosis, and create a proforma to ensure the comprehensiveness of clinical information.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed vascular anomaly referral letters received by Hospital Tunku Azizah from 2018 to 2023. Specifically, we descriptively analyzed the inclusion of vascular anomaly characteristics, the demographic profiles of referrers and patients, and basic clinical findings. Subsequently, we developed a redesigned proforma.
resultsOverall, 47 referral letters were analyzed. The patients comprised 25 boys and 22 girls, with ages ranging from birth to 14 years. Patient name, sex, and date of birth, along with the referrer's name and address, were satisfactorily documented. The review revealed that 44 (93.6%) of the letters included the patient's presenting problem, 43 (91.5%) contained clinical findings, 37 (78.7%) reported diagnostic investigations, and 29 (61%) referenced medical history. Regarding characteristics of vascular conditions, over half of the letters detailed time of appearance (n= 40, 85%), growth (n= 24, 66%), complications (n= 25, 53.2%), color (n= 32, 68%), and shape (n= 34, 72%). However, fewer than half mentioned compressibility (n= 7, 14.8%), pulsation (n= 7, 14.7%), and associated conditions (n= 2, 4.3%), and none referenced involution.
conclusionAlthough demographic data were generally well-documented, critical medical history information was frequently omitted, including a lack of adequate pre-referral investigations. Key characteristics of vascular anomalies, namely compressibility, pulsation, associated conditions, and involution, were frequently overlooked. Accurate documentation of these features is crucial for determining treatment urgency. A standardized proforma must be implemented to ensure that vital information is captured, thus facilitating diagnosis and optimizing patient care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.