Common Maternal Genetic Syndromes II: Marfan Syndrome

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Said Al-Beshri ◽  
Nathaniel H. Robin

Marfan syndrome is an autosomal dominant syndrome that affects various connective tissues including the aorta and skeletal system. It represent a major cause of aortic dissection in individuals with seemingly unremarkable past medical history, and is the most common cause of aortic dissection in pregnancy. Prompt and accurate diagnosis can be lifesaving. Careful physical examination and detailed personal and family history is vital for clinical evaluation. Genetic testing is often needed for accurate diagnosis but result interpretation might be challenging and genetic counseling is always required. Established guidelines can help navigate the challenges in obstetric management, which may include major surgical interventions during or after pregnancy. This review contains 6 figures, 4 tables, and 40 references. Keywords: Marfan syndrome, FBN1, aortic dissection, dilatation, connective tissue, ectopia lentis, pectus, systemic score, Ghent diagnostic criteria, genetic testing.

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Said Al-Beshri ◽  
Nathaniel H. Robin

Marfan syndrome is an autosomal dominant syndrome that affects various connective tissues including the aorta and skeletal system. It represent a major cause of aortic dissection in individuals with seemingly unremarkable past medical history, and is the most common cause of aortic dissection in pregnancy. Prompt and accurate diagnosis can be lifesaving. Careful physical examination and detailed personal and family history is vital for clinical evaluation. Genetic testing is often needed for accurate diagnosis but result interpretation might be challenging and genetic counseling is always required. Established guidelines can help navigate the challenges in obstetric management, which may include major surgical interventions during or after pregnancy. This review contains 6 figures, 4 tables, and 40 references. Keywords: Marfan syndrome, FBN1, aortic dissection, dilatation, connective tissue, ectopia lentis, pectus, systemic score, Ghent diagnostic criteria, genetic testing.


2021 ◽  
pp. 112067212199295
Author(s):  
Gurkan Erdogan ◽  
Nilay Kandemir Besek ◽  
Betul Onal Gunay ◽  
Alper Agca

Objective: To investigate the clinical outcomes of three surgical approaches for ectopia lentis in Marfan syndrome (MS) patients who had undergone crystalline lens removal with posterior chamber intraocular lens (IOL) implantation techniques comprising the intrascleral fixation of IOL, sutured scleral fixation of IOL, and IOL implantation with the use of a Cionni capsular tension ring (CTR). Methods: This is a retrospective comparative study, including 35 eyes of 21 patients who underwent the intrascleral fixation of IOL (group 1), scleral IOL fixation with the Z-suture (group 2), and IOL implantation with the use of a Cionni CTR (group 3) following crystalline lens removal. The surgical indications were as follows: no improvement in visual function after eyeglasses or contact lens application due to excessive irregular astigmatism and advanced crystalline lens decentration in which the edge of the crystalline lens came up to the optical axis, or dislocation of the crystalline lens resulting in aphakia and secondary glaucoma due to lens dislocation. The surgical outcomes and complications due to surgery were compared between the groups. Results: The mean age of the patients in the study was 12.3 ± 8.7 years (5–32 years). There were 10 eyes in group 1, 13 eyes in group 2, and 12 eyes in group 3. Visual acuity improved significantly in each group after surgery. Ocular residual astigmatism did not differ significantly between the groups ( p = 0.51). Conclusion: There were no significant differences between the three surgical approaches in the current study in terms of the postoperative results and complications.


2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bryn D. Webb ◽  
Irini Manoli ◽  
Elizabeth C. Engle ◽  
Ethylin W. Jabs

AbstractThere is a broad differential for patients presenting with congenital facial weakness, and initial misdiagnosis unfortunately is common for this phenotypic presentation. Here we present a framework to guide evaluation of patients with congenital facial weakness disorders to enable accurate diagnosis. The core categories of causes of congenital facial weakness include: neurogenic, neuromuscular junction, myopathic, and other. This diagnostic algorithm is presented, and physical exam considerations, additional follow-up studies and/or consultations, and appropriate genetic testing are discussed in detail. This framework should enable clinical geneticists, neurologists, and other rare disease specialists to feel prepared when encountering this patient population and guide diagnosis, genetic counseling, and clinical care.


2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mandana Master ◽  
Gavin Day

We report a case of acute aortic dissection in a lady of 28 weeks of gestation with undiagnosed Marfan syndrome. The patient had been seen in our antenatal clinics. Her history documented in her pregnancy record was negative for genetic/congenital abnormalities. There was no family history documented. Subsequently, at 28 weeks of gestation, the patient presented with sudden onset chest, jaw, and back pain. Further history revealed that her father had died at the age of 27 of an aortic dissection. Echocardiography showed aortic root dissection with occlusion of aortic branches. She subsequently underwent an emergency lower segment caesarean section followed by surgical repair of type A dissection. A simultaneous type B dissection was managed conservatively. On later examination, our patient fulfilled the diagnostic criteria for phenotypic expression of Marfan syndrome. Genetic testing also confirmed that she has a mutation of the fibrillin (FBN 1) gene associated with the disease.


2017 ◽  
Vol 154 (4) ◽  
pp. 1175-1189.e2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei-Guo Ma ◽  
Wei Zhang ◽  
Jun-Ming Zhu ◽  
Bulat A. Ziganshin ◽  
Ai-Hua Zhi ◽  
...  

2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. e180-e183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hiroshi Nishino ◽  
Kenji Suda ◽  
Akitaka Kuramaoto ◽  
Yoshihiro Honda ◽  
Kiyoko Takemiya ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 74 (3) ◽  
pp. e300-e301
Author(s):  
Karina Newhall ◽  
Thoetphum Benyakorn ◽  
Stephanie Banning ◽  
Palcah Shibale ◽  
Matthew P. Sweet ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
B Lledo ◽  
R Morales ◽  
J A Ortiz ◽  
A Cascales ◽  
A Fabregat ◽  
...  

Abstract Study question Could cryptic subtelomeric traslocations in early recurrent miscarriage patients be diagnosed by preimplantation genetic testing? Summary answer PGT is a powerful tool to detect subtelomeric cryptic traslocations identifying the cause of early recurrent miscarriage and allowing subsequent genetic counselling. What is known already: Chromosome translocations are frequently associated with birth defects, spontaneous early pregnancy losses and infertility. However, submicroscopic traslocations (so-called cryptic traslocations) are too small to be detected by conventional karyotyping.. Due to balanced status, high resolution molecular techniques as arrayCGH are not able to detect it. Thus, cryptic traslocations detection is challenging. PGT is able to detect CNVs at higher resolution than routine karyotyping. Therefore, the recurrent diagnosis of CNV at embryo level could suggest a subchromosomal parental traslocation. The aim of this study is to investigate the feasibility of using PGT as an indicator of parental balanced cryptic traslocations. Study design, size, duration We included three couples who underwent PGT for unexplained repeated pregnancy loss (RPL) in our clinic from February 2020 to November 2020. Common established causes of RPL (uterine anomalies, antiphospholipid syndrome, immunological, hormonal and metabolic disorders) were previously rouled-out. Even couple karyotypes were normal. Twenty-three embryos from those couples were biopsied at blastocyst and analysed for CNVs detection using low coverage whole genome NGS. Participants/materials, setting, methods PGT by NGS was performed by Veriseq-NGS (Illumina), with previous whole genome amplification. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) using parental blood samples were performed to validate the origin of subchromosomal number variation. Commercially available subtelomeric specific probes were selected according to the CNV identified and the procedures were performed according to the manufacturer’s protocols. Main results and the role of chance Overall, CNVs of terminal duplication and deletion that imply unbalanced traslocation derivatives were detected in the 43.5% of biopsied embryos. For couple 1, 4 out of 5 embryos (80%) carried deletion of telomeric region on chromosomes 5 and 21. Three out of 6 biopsed embyos (50%) were diagnosed with subchromosomal copy variants at telomeric region on chromosomes 6 and 16 for couple 2. In the case of couple 3, three out of 12 embryos (25%) were carriers of CNV at subtelomeric region on chromosomes 2 and 6. The size of CNVs detected ranges from 8Mb to 20Mb. Accurate diagnosis with the parental study was made by FISH. The combination of probes to detect the structural chromosome alteration were: Tel5qter-LSI21q, Tel6pter-CEP16 and Tel6pter-CEP6 for each couple respectively. The FISH studies reveal that CNVs were inherited from one parent carrying the balanced cryptic traslocation. Ultimately, the abnormal karyotype from the carrier parent were 46,XY,t(5;21)(q33.2;q21.2) for couple 1, 46,XY,t(6;16)(p22.3;q22.1) for couple 2 and 46,XY,t(2;6)(p25.1;p24.2) for couple 3. Finally, each couple performed a cryotransfer of a single normal balanced embryo. Two pregnancies are ongoing. Limitations, reasons for caution The main limitation of this approach is the NGS- PGT resolution. CNVs smaller than 5Mb could not be detected. Wider implications of the findings: This study shows the value of PGT for unexplained RPL, followed by parental FISH to better characterize CNVs and identify couples in whom one partner carries a cryptic translocation. Accurate diagnosis of parental chromosome translocation can achieve with FISH only, but FISH would not be performed unless PGT showed CNVs. Trial registration number Not applicable


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document