
AbstractConjoined triplets are among the rarest of human malformations, as are asymmetric or parasitic conjoined twins. Based on a very modest corpus of recent literature, we applied the embryonic disk model of conjoined twinning to 10 previously reported cases involving asymmetric anatomical multiplications to determine whether they concerned conjoined twins or conjoined triplets. In spite of their phenotypic similarities, we diagnosed four of these cases as conjoined twins and three of them as conjoined triplets. In the remaining three cases, no definite diagnosis could be made, as essential information was lacking from the reports. We conclude that it is not necessarily the expected duplication or triplication of structures that points to the correct diagnosis in these cases, but the number and mutual position of the hearts they presented with. Considering their rarity we stress to thoroughly investigate and describe internal (dys)morphology in novel cases of (asymmetric) conjoined twins and triplets to further unravel their pathogenicity and come to the correct diagnoses.
Radboudumc 18: Healthcare improvement science RIHS: Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Heart, heart, embryonic disk model, congenital anomaly, Medical Imaging - Radboud University Medical Center, conjoined twins, embryology, Humans, conjoined triplets, Radboudumc 0: Other Research RIHS: Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Review Articles, Twins, Conjoined, teratology
Radboudumc 18: Healthcare improvement science RIHS: Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Heart, heart, embryonic disk model, congenital anomaly, Medical Imaging - Radboud University Medical Center, conjoined twins, embryology, Humans, conjoined triplets, Radboudumc 0: Other Research RIHS: Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Review Articles, Twins, Conjoined, teratology
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 9 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
