You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Archimedes
Do all newborns with an isolated sacrococcygeal dimple require investigation for spinal dysraphism?
  1. Francesca Seregni1,
  2. Tom Weatherby2,
  3. Kathy Beardsall3
  1. 1 Paediatric Department, West Suffolk Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Bury Saint Edmunds, UK
  2. 2 School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
  3. 3 Neonatal Medicine, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Francesca Seregni, Paediatric Department, West Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust, Bury Saint Edmunds IP33 2QZ, UK; francesca.seregni{at}nhs.net

https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2019-317058

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Scenario

    While performing a routine baby check, you notice an isolated 2 mm wide sacrococcygeal dimple within the gluteal fold, 20 mm from the anus, in an otherwise well baby who is moving her legs normally. The mother has been doing some reading on the internet and has become worried about spina bifida. You wonder whether to request a spinal ultrasound.

    Structured clinical question

    In an otherwise well neonate with an isolated sacrococcygeal dimple (patient), is imaging (intervention) warranted to rule out spinal dysraphism (outcome)?

    Search

    A search of the Cochrane database was performed, using the string ‘(sacrococcygeal OR intergluteal OR coccygeal OR sacral) AND (dimple OR pit OR pits OR sinus) AND (dysraphia OR dysraphism OR …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

    • Patient consent for publication Not required.

    Linked Articles