The main diagnostic tools for evaluating FND are X-rays and CT-scans of the skull. These tools could display any possible intracranial pathology in FND. For example, CT can be used to reveal widening of nasal bones. Diagnostics are mainly used before reconstructive surgery, for proper planning and preparation.

Prenatally, various features of FND (such as hypertelorism) can be recognized using ultrasound techniques. However, only three cases of FND have been diagnosed based on a prenatal ultrasound.

Other conditions may also show symptoms of FND. For example, there are other syndromes that also represent with hypertelorism. Furthermore, disorders like an intracranial cyst can affect the frontonasal region, which can lead to symptoms similar to FND. Therefore, other options should always be considered in the differential diagnosis.

Carrier testing for Roberts syndrome requires prior identification of the disease-causing mutation in the family. Carriers for the disorder are heterozygotes due to the autosomal recessive nature of the disease. Carriers are also not at risk for contracting Roberts syndrome themselves. A prenatal diagnosis of Roberts syndrome requires an ultrasound examination paired with cytogenetic testing or prior identification of the disease-causing ESCO2 mutations in the family.

Genetic testing may be available for mutations in the FGDY1 gene. Genetic counseling is indicated for individuals or families who may carry this condition, as there are overlapping features with fetal alcohol syndrome.

Other examinations or tests can help with diagnosis. These can include:

detailed family history

- conducting a detailed physical examination to document morphological features

- testing for genetic defect in FGDY1

- x-rays can identify skeletal abnormalities

- echo cardiogram can screen for heart abnormalities

- CT scan of the brain for cystic development

- X-ray of the teeth

- Ultrasound of abdomen to identify undescended testis

The diagnosis of this syndrome can be made on clinical examination and perinatal autopsy.

Koenig and Spranger (1986) noted that eye lesions are apparently nonobligatory components of the syndrome. The diagnosis of Fraser syndrome should be entertained in patients with a combination of acrofacial and urogenital malformations with or without cryptophthalmos. Thomas et al. (1986) also emphasized the occurrence of the cryptophthalmos syndrome without cryptophthalmos and proposed diagnostic criteria for Fraser syndrome. Major criteria consisted of cryptophthalmos, syndactyly, abnormal genitalia, and positive family history. Minor criteria were congenital malformation of the nose, ears, or larynx, cleft lip and/or palate, skeletal defects, umbilical hernia, renal agenesis, and mental retardation. Diagnosis was based on the presence of at least 2 major and 1 minor criteria, or 1 major and 4 minor criteria.

Boyd et al. (1988) suggested that prenatal diagnosis by ultrasound examination of eyes, digits, and kidneys should detect the severe form of the syndrome. Serville et al. (1989) demonstrated the feasibility of ultrasonographic diagnosis of the Fraser syndrome at 18 weeks' gestation. They suggested that the diagnosis could be made if 2 of the following signs are present: obstructive uropathy, microphthalmia, syndactyly, and oligohydramnios. Schauer et al. (1990) made the diagnosis at 18.5 weeks' gestation on the basis of sonography. Both the female fetus and the phenotypically normal father had a chromosome anomaly: inv(9)(p11q21). An earlier born infant had Fraser syndrome and the same chromosome 9 inversion.

Van Haelst et al. (2007) provided a revision of the diagnostic criteria for Fraser syndrome according to Thomas et al. (1986) through the addition of airway tract and urinary tract anomalies to the major criteria and removal of mental retardation and clefting as criteria. Major criteria included syndactyly, cryptophthalmos spectrum, urinary tract abnormalities, ambiguous genitalia, laryngeal and tracheal anomalies, and positive family history. Minor criteria included anorectal defects, dysplastic ears, skull ossification defects, umbilical abnormalities, and nasal anomalies. Cleft lip and/or palate, cardiac malformations, musculoskeletal anomalies, and mental retardation were considered uncommon. Van Haelst et al. (2007) suggested that the diagnosis of Fraser syndrome can be made if either 3 major criteria, or 2 major and 2 minor criteria, or 1 major and 3 minor criteria are present in a patient.

Prenatal Diagnosis:

- Aymé, "et al." (1989) reported prenatal diagnosis of Fryns syndrome by sonography between 24 and 27 weeks.

- Manouvrier-Hanu et al. (1996) described the prenatal diagnosis of Fryns syndrome by ultrasonographic detection of diaphragmatic hernia and cystic hygroma. The diagnosis was confirmed after termination of the pregnancy. The fetus also had 2 erupted incisors; natal teeth had not been mentioned in other cases of Fryns syndrome.

Differential Diagnosis:

- McPherson et al. (1993) noted the phenotypic overlap between Fryns syndrome and the Pallister–Killian syndrome (601803), which is a dysmorphic syndrome with tissue-specific mosaicism of tetrasomy 12p.

- Veldman et al. (2002) discussed the differentiation between Fryns syndrome and Pallister–Killian syndrome, noting that differentiation is important to genetic counseling because Fryns syndrome is an autosomal recessive disorder and Pallister–Killian syndrome is usually a sporadic chromosomal aberration. However, discrimination may be difficult due to the phenotypic similarity. In fact, in some infants with 'coarse face,' acral hypoplasia, and internal anomalies, the initial diagnosis of Fryns syndrome had to be changed because mosaicism of isochromosome 12p was detected in fibroblast cultures or kidney tissue. Although congenital diaphragmatic hernia is a common finding in both syndromes, bilateral congenital diaphragmatic hernia had been reported only in patients with Fryns syndrome until the report of the patient with Pallister–Killian syndrome by Veldman et al. (2002).

- Slavotinek (2004) reviewed the phenotypes of 52 reported cases of Fryns syndrome and reevaluated the diagnostic guidelines. She concluded that congenital diaphragmatic hernia and distal limb hypoplasia are strongly suggestive of Fryns syndrome, with other diagnostically relevant findings including pulmonary hypoplasia, craniofacial dysmorphism, polyhydramnios, and orofacial clefting. Slavotinek (2004) stated that other distinctive anomalies not mentioned in previous guidelines include ventricular dilatation or hydrocephalus, agenesis of the corpus callosum, abnormalities of the aorta, dilatation of the ureters, proximal thumbs, and broad clavicles.

Orofaciodigital syndrome type 1 is diagnosed through genetic testing. Some symptoms of Orofaciodigital syndrome type 1 are oral features such as, split tongue, benign tumors on the tongue, cleft palate, hypodontia and other dental abnormalities. Other symptoms of the face include hypertelorism and micrognathia. Bodily abnormalities such as webbed, short, joined, or abnormally curved fingers and toes are also symptoms of Orofaciodigital syndrome type 1. The most frequent symptoms are accessory oral frenulum, broad alveolar ridges, frontal bossing, high palate, hypertelorism, lobulated tongue, median cleft lip, and wide nasal bridge. Genetic screening of the OFD1 gene is used to officially diagnose a patient who has the syndrome, this is detected in 85% of individuals who are suspected to have Orofaciodigital syndrome type 1.

Genetic counseling for VWS involves discussion of disease transmission in the autosomal dominant manner and possibilities for penetrance and expression in offspring. Autosomal dominance means affected parents have a 50% chance of passing on their mutated "IRF6" allele to a their child. Furthermore, if a cleft patient has lip pits, he or she has a ten times greater risk of having a child with cleft lip with or without cleft palate than a cleft patient who does not have lip pits. Types of clefting between parents and affected children are significantly associated; however, different types of clefts may occur horizontally and vertically within the same pedigree. In cases where clefting is the only symptom, a complete family history must be taken to ensure the patient does not have non-syndromic clefting.

Cytogenetic preparations that have been stained by either Giemsa or C-banding techniques will show two characteristic chromosomal abnormalities. The first chromosomal abnormality is called premature centromere separation (PCS) and is the most likely pathogenic mechanism for Roberts syndrome. Chromosomes that have PCS will have their centromeres separate during metaphase rather than anaphase (one phase earlier than normal chromosomes). The second chromosomal abnormality is called heterochromatin repulsion (HR). Chromosomes that have HR experience separation of the heterochromatic regions during metaphase. Chromosomes with these two abnormalities will display a "railroad track" appearance because of the absence of primary constriction and repulsion at the heterochromatic regions. The heterochromatic regions are the areas near the centromeres and nucleolar organizers. Carrier status cannot be determined by cytogenetic testing. Other common findings of cytogenetic testing on Roberts syndrome patients are listed below.

- Aneuploidy- the occurrence of one or more extra or missing chromosomes

- Micronucleation- nucleus is smaller than normal

- Multilobulated Nuclei- the nucleus has more than one lobe

It is suggested that the diagnostic criteria for Malpuech syndrome should include cleft lip and/or palate, typical associated facial features, and at least two of the following: urogenital anomalies, caudal appendage, and growth or developmental delay.

Due to the relatively high rate of hearing impairment found with the disorder, it too may be considered in the diagnosis. Another congenital disorder, Wolf-Hirschhorn (Pitt-Rogers-Danks) syndrome, shares Malpuech features in its diagnostic criteria. Because of this lacking differentiation, karyotyping (microscopic analysis of the chromosomes of an individual) can be employed to distinguish the two. Whereas deletions in the short arm of chromosome 4 would be revealed with Wolf-Hirschhorn, a karyotype without this aberration present would favor a Malpuech syndrome diagnosis. Also, the karyotype of an individual with Malpuech syndrome alone will be normal.

The diagnosis is usually based on clinical features present at birth.

Ultrasound in the second trimester may show abnormalities associates with NLS, including polyhydramnios, intrauterine growth restriction, microcephaly, proptosis and decreased fetal motility.

Because the variability of this disease is so great and the way that it reveals itself could be multi-faceted; once diagnosed, a multidisciplinary team is recommended to treat the disease and should include a craniofacial surgeon, ophthalmologist, pediatrician, pediatric urologist, cardiologist, pulmonologist, speech pathologist, and a medical geneticist. Several important steps must be followed, as well.

- Past medical history

- Physical examination with special attention to size and measurements of facial features, palate, heart, genitourinary system and lower respiratory system

- Eye evaluation

- Hypospadias assessment by urologist

- Laryngoscopy and chest x-ray for difficulties with breathing/swallowing

- Cleft lip/palate assessment by craniofacial surgeon

- Assessment of standard age developmental and intellectual abilities

- Anal position assessment

- Echocardiogram

- Cranial imaging

Many surgical repairs may be needed, as assessed by professionals. Furthermore, special education therapies and psychoemotional therapies may be required, as well. In some cases, antireflux drugs can be prescribed until risk of breathing and swallowing disorders are removed. Genetic counseling is highly advised to help explain who else in the family may be at risk for the disease and to help guide family planning decisions in the future.

Because of its wide variability in which defects will occur, there is no known mortality rate specifically for the disease. However, the leading cause of death for people with Opitz G/BBB syndrome is due to infant death caused by aspiration due to esophageal, pharyngeal or laryngeal defects.

Fortunately, to date there are no factors that can increase the expression of symptoms of this disease. All abnormalities and symptoms are present at birth.

Opitz G/BBB Syndrome is a rare genetic condition caused by one of two major types of mutations: MID1 mutation on the short (p) arm of the X chromosome or a mutation of the 22q11.2 gene on the 22nd chromosome. Since it is a genetic disease, it is an inherited condition. However, there is an extremely wide variability in how the disease presents itself.

In terms of prevention, several researchers strongly suggest prenatal testing for at-risk pregnancies if a MID1 mutation has been identified in a family member. Doctors can perform a fetal sex test through chromosome analysis and then screen the DNA for any mutations causing the disease. Knowing that a child may be born with Opitz G/BBB syndrome could help physicians prepare for the child’s needs and the family prepare emotionally. Furthermore, genetic counseling for young adults that are affected, are carriers or are at risk of carrying is strongly suggested, as well (Meroni, Opitz G/BBB syndrome, 2012). Current research suggests that the cause is genetic and no known environmental risk factors have been documented. The only education for prevention suggested is genetic testing for at-risk young adults when a mutation is found or suspected in a family member.

Prognoses for 3C syndrome vary widely based on the specific constellation of symptoms seen in an individual. Typically, the gravity of the prognosis correlates with the severity of the cardiac abnormalities. For children with less severe cardiac abnormalities, the developmental prognosis depends on the cerebellar abnormalities that are present. Severe cerebellar hypoplasia is associated with growth and speech delays, as well as hypotonia and general growth deficiencies.

The prognosis is poor; affected individuals are either stillborn or die shortly after birth. The longest survival reported in literature is of 134 days.

This syndrome is transmitted as an autosomal recessive disorder and there is a risk for recurrence of 25% in future pregnancies.

Treatment is usually confined to such surgical intervention as may be necessary to help the child to develop e.g. jaw distraction/bone grafts, ocular dermoid debulking (see below), repairing cleft palate/lip, repairing heart malformations or spinal surgery. Some patients with Goldenhar syndrome will require assistance as they grow by means of hearing aids or glasses.

Stem cell grafting (womb tissue grafting) has been successfully used to "reprogram" eye dermoids, effectively halting the regrowth of eye dermoids.

These tissues that grow on the eye are "mis-programmed" cells (sometimes tooth or nail cells instead of eye cells).

This includes Ataxia-telegiectasia, Chédiak-Higashi syndrome, DiGeorge syndrome, Griscelli syndrome and Marinesco-Sjogren syndrome.

The diagnostic work up usually includes and MRI of the brain, an EEG, ophthalmic examination and a cardiac ECHO.

Muscle biopsy - which is not commonly done - may show storage of abnormal material and secondary mitochondrial abnormalities in skeletal muscle. Other features that may be seen on muscle biopsy include variability in fibre size, increase in internal and centralized nuclei, type 1 fibre hypotrophy with normally sized type 2 fibres, increased glycogen storage and variable vacuoles on light microscopy

The diagnosis is confirmed by sequencing of the EPG5.

Figueroa and Pruzanksky classified HFM patients into three different types:

- Type I : Mild hypoplasia of the ramus , and the body of the mandible is slightly affected.

- Type II : The condyle and ramus are small, the head of the condyle is flattened , the glenoid fossa is absent , the condyle is hinged on a flat, often convex, infratemporal surface , the coronoid may be absent.

- Type III: The ramus is reduced to a thin lamina of bone or is completely absent. There is no evidence of a TMJ.

The outcome of this disease is dependent on the severity of the cardiac defects. Approximately 1 in 3 children with this diagnosis require shunting for the hydrocephaly that is often a consequence. Some children require extra assistance or therapy for delayed psychomotor and speech development, including hypotonia.

Lip pits may be surgically removed either for aesthetic reasons or discomfort due to inflammation caused by bacterial infections or chronic saliva excretion, though spontaneous shrinkage of the lip pits has occurred in some rare cases. Chronic inflammation has also been reported to cause squamous-cell carcinoma. It is essential to completely remove the entire lip pit canal, as mucoid cysts can develop if mucous glands are not removed. A possible side effect of removing the lip pits is a loose lip muscle. Other conditions associated with VWS, including CL, CP, congenital heart defects, etc. are surgically corrected or otherwise treated as they would be if they were non-syndromic.

Modeling EEC syndrome in vitro has been achieved by reprogramming EEC fibroblasts carrying mutations R304W and R204W into induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) lines. EEC-iPSC recapitulated defective epidermal and corneal fates. This model further identified PRIMA-1MET, a small compound that was identified as a compound targeting and reactivating p53 mutants based on a cell-based screening for rescuing the apoptotic activity of p53, as efficient to rescue R304W mutation defect. Of interest, similar effect had been observed on keratinocytes derived from the same patients. PRIMA-1MET could become an effective therapeutic tool for EEC patients.

Further genetic research is necessary to identify and rule out other possible loci contributing to EEC syndrome, though it seems certain that disruption of the p63 gene is involved to some extent. In addition, genetic research with an emphasis on genetic syndrome differentiation should prove to be very useful in distinguishing between syndromes that present with very similar clinical findings. There is much debate in current literature regarding clinical markers for syndromic diagnoses. Genetic findings could have great implications in clinical diagnosis and treatment of not only EEC, but also many other related syndromes.

Malpuech syndrome has been shown to have physical, or phenotypical similarities with several other genetic disorders. A report by Reardon et al. (2001) of a nine-year-old boy exhibiting facial, caudal and urogenital anomalies consistent with Malpuech syndrome, who also had skeletal malformites indicative of Juberg-Hayward syndrome, suggests that the two disorders may be allelic (caused by different mutations of the same gene).

Along with several other disorders that have similar, or overlapping features and autosomal recessive inheritance, Malpuech syndrome has been considered to belong under the designation "3MC syndrome". Titomanlio et al. (2005) described a three-year-old female known to have Michels syndrome. In their review of the physical similarities between Michels, Malpuech and Mingarelli-Carnevale syndromes—particularly the facial appearance including instances of cleft lip and palate, and ptosis, and a similarity of congenital abdominal and urogenital anomalies—they believed the syndromes may represent a spectrum of genetic disorders rather than three individual disorders. They initially suggested this spectrum could be named 3MC (Michels-Malpuech-Mingarelli-Carnevale) syndrome. This conclusion and the name 3MC syndrome was supported by Leal et al. (2008), who reported a brother and sister with an array of symptoms that overlapped the various syndromes. Further assertion of 3MC syndrome was by Rooryck et al. (2011) in an elaboration of its cause.

Depending upon the treatment required, it is sometimes most appropriate to wait until later in life for a surgical remedy – the childhood growth of the face may highlight or increase the symptoms. When surgery is required, particularly when there is a severe disfiguration of the jaw, it is common to use a rib graft to help correct the shape.

According to literature, HFM patients can be treated with various treatment options such functional therapy with an appliance, distraction osteogenesis, or costochondral graft. The treatment is based on the type of severity for these patients. According to Pruzanksky's classification, if the patient has moderate to severe symptoms, then surgery is preferred. If patient has mild symptoms, then a functional appliance is generally used.

Patients can also benefit from a Bone Anchored Hearing Aid (BAHA).

The syndrome is generally diagnosed clinically shortly after birth. The infant usually has respiratory difficulty, especially when supine. The cleft palate is often U-shaped and wider than in cleft palate that is not associated with this syndrome.

Orofaciodigital syndrome type 1 can be treated with reconstructive surgery or the affected parts of the body. Surgery of cleft palate, tongue nodules, additional teeth, accessory frenulae, and orthodontia for malocclusion. Routine treatment for patients with renal disease and seizures may also be necessary. Speech therapy and special education in the later development may also be used as management.