Screening athletes for cardiac disease can be problematic because of low prevalence and inaccurate performance of various tests that have been used. Nevertheless, sudden death among seemingly healthy individuals attracts much public and legislator attention because of its visible and tragic nature.

As an example, the Texas Legislature appropriated US$1 million for a pilot study of statewide athlete screening in 2007. The study employed a combination of questionnaire, examination and electrocardiography for 2,506 student athletes, followed by echocardiography for 2,051 of them, including any students with abnormal findings from the first three steps. The questionnaire alone flagged 35% of the students as potentially at risk, but there were many false positive results, with actual disease being confirmed in less than 2%. Further, a substantial number of screen-positive students declined repeated recommendations for follow-up evaluation. (Individuals who are conclusively diagnosed with cardiac disease are usually told to avoid competitive sports.) It should be stressed that this was a single pilot program, but it was indicative of the problems associated with large-scale screening, and consistent with experience in other locations with low prevalence of sudden death in athletes.

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.

A temporal-bone CT using thin slices makes it possible to diagnose the degree of stenosis and atresia of the external auditory canal, the status of the middle ear cavity, the absent or dysplastic and rudimentary ossicles, or inner ear abnormalities such as a deficient cochlea. Two- and three-dimensional CT reconstructions with VRT and bone and skin-surfacing are helpful for more accurate staging and the three-dimensional planning of mandibular and external ear reconstructive surgery.

After the first discovery and description of Marshall–Smith syndrome in 1971, research to this rare syndrome has been carried out.

- Adam, M., Hennekam, R.C.M., Butler, M.G., Raf, M., Keppen, L., Bull, M., Clericuzio, C., Burke, L., Guttacher, A., Ormond, K., & Hoyme, H.E. (2002). Marshall–Smith syndrome: An osteochondrodysplasia with connective tissue abnormalities. 23rd Annual David W. Smith Workshop on Malformations and Morphogenesis, August 7, Clemson, SC.

- Adam MP, Hennekam RC, Keppen LD, Bull MJ, Clericuzio CL, Burke LW, Guttmacher AE, Ormond KE and Hoyme HE: Marshall-Smith Syndrome: Natural history and evidence of an osteochondrodysplasia with connective tissue abnormalities. American Journal of Medical Genetics 137A:117–124, 2005.

- Baldellou Vazquez A, Ruiz-Echarri Zelaya MP, Loris Pablo C, Ferr#{225}ndez Longas A, Tamparillas Salvador M. El sIndrome de Marshall-Smith: a prop#{243}sito de una observad#{243}n personal. An Esp Pediatr 1983; 18:45-50.

- Butler, M.G. (2003). Marshall–Smith syndrome. In: The NORD Guide to Rare Disorders. (pp219–220) Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, PA.

- Charon A, Gillerot T, Van Maldergem L, Van Schaftingen MH, de Bont B, Koulischer L. The Marshall–Smith syndrome. Eur J Pediatr 1990; 150: 54-5.

- Dernedde, G., Pendeville, P., Veyckemans, F., Verellen, G. & Gillerot, Y. (1998). Anaesthetic management of a child with Marshall–Smith syndrome. Canadian Journal of Anesthesia. 45 (7): 660. Anaesthetic management of a child with Marshall-Smith syndrome

- Diab, M., Raff, M., Gunther, D.F. (2002). Osseous fragility in Marshall–Smith syndrome. Clinical Report: Osseous fragility in Marshall-Smith syndrome

- Ehresmann, T., Gillessen-Kaesbach G., Koenig R. (2005). Late diagnosis of Marshall Smith Syndrome (MSS). In: Medgen 17.

- Hassan M, Sutton T, Mage K, LimalJM, Rappaport R. The syndrome of accelerated bone maturation in the newborn infant with dysmorphism and congenital malformations: (the so-called Marshall–Smith syndrome). Pediatr Radiol 1976; 5:53-57.

- Hoyme HE and Bull MJ: The Marshall-Smith Syndrome: Natural history beyond infancy. Western Society for Pediatric Research, Carmel, California, February, 1987. Clin Res 35:68A, 1987.

- Hoyme HE and Bull MJ: The Marshall-Smith Syndrome: Natural history beyond infancy. David W. Smith Morphogenesis and Malformations Workshop. Greenville, SC, August, 1987. Proceedings of the Greenwood Genetics Center 7:152, 1988.

- Hoyme HE, Byers PH, Guttmacher AE: Marshall–Smith syndrome: Further evidence of an osteochondrodysplasia in long-term survivors. David W. Smith Morphogenesis and Malformations Workshop, Winston-Salem, NC, August, 1992. Proceedings of the Greenwood Genetic Center 12:70, 1993.

- .

- Tzu-Jou Wang (2002). Marshall–Smith syndrome in a Taiwanese patient with T-cell immunodeficiency. Am J Med Genet Part A;112 (1):107-108.

Other diseases have similar characteristics to Treacher Collins syndrome. In the differential diagnosis, one should consider the acrofacial dysostoses. The facial appearance resembles that of Treacher Collins syndrome, but additional limb abnormalities occur in those persons. Examples of these diseases are Nager syndrome and Miller syndrome.

The oculoauriculovertebral spectrum should also be considered in the differential diagnosis. An example is hemifacial microsomia, which primarily affects development of the ear, mouth, and mandible. This anomaly may occur bilaterally. Another disease which belongs to this spectrum is Goldenhar syndrome, which includes vertebral abnormalities, epibulbar dermoids and facial deformities.

Screening generally only takes place among those displaying several of the symptoms of ABCD, but a study on a large group of institutionalized deaf people in Columbia revealed that 5.38% of them were Waardenburg patients. Because of its rarity, none of the patients were diagnosed with ABCD (Waardenburg Type IV). Nothing can be done to prevent the disease.

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.

Marshall–Smith syndrome is not to be confused with:

- Marshall syndrome (aka.Periodic fever, aphthous stomatitis, pharyngitis and adenitis (PFAPA syndrome, see also: Periodic fever syndrome)

- Sotos (like) syndrome

- Weaver-Smith syndrome (WSS)

Cardiomyopathies are generally inherited as autosomal dominants, although recessive forms have been described, and dilated cardiomyopathy can also be inherited in an X-linked pattern. Consequently, in addition to tragedy involving an athlete who succumbs, there are medical implications for close relatives. Among family members of index cases, more than 300 causative mutations have been identified. However, not all mutations have the same potential for severe outcomes, and there is not yet a clear understanding of how these mutations (which affect the same myosin protein molecule) can lead to the dramatically different clinical characteristics and outcomes associated with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) and dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM).

Since HCM, as an example, is typically an autosomal dominant trait, each child of an HCM parent has a 50% chance of inheriting the mutation. In individuals without a family history, the most common cause of the disease is a "de novo" mutation of the gene that produces the β-myosin heavy chain.

The occurrence of WS has been reported to be one in 45,000 in Europe. The diagnosis can be made prenatally by ultrasound due to the phenotype displaying pigmentary disturbances, facial abnormalities, and other developmental defects. After birth, the diagnosis is initially made symptomatically and can be confirmed through genetic testing. If the diagnosis is not made early enough, complications can arise from

Hirschsprung's disease.

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

Diagnosis is usually based on clinical findings, although fetal chromosome testing will show trisomy 13. While many of the physical findings are similar to Edwards syndrome there are a few unique traits, such as polydactyly. However, unlike Edwards syndrome and Down syndrome, the quad screen does not provide a reliable means of screening for this disorder. This is due to the variability of the results seen in fetuses with Patau.

In general, children with a small isolated nevus and a normal physical exam do not need further testing; treatment may include potential surgical removal of the nevus. If syndrome issues are suspected, neurological, ocular, and skeletal exams are important. Laboratory investigations may include serum and urine calcium and phosphate, and possibly liver and renal function tests. The choice of imaging studies depends on the suspected abnormalities and might include skeletal survey, CT scan of the head, MRI, and/or EEG.

Depending on the systems involved, an individual with Schimmelpenning syndrome may need to see an interdisciplinary team of specialists: dermatologist, neurologist, ophthalmologist, orthopedic surgeon, oral surgeon, plastic surgeon, psychologist.

In the United States, sarcoidosis has a prevalence of approximately 10 cases per 100,000 whites and 36 cases per 100,000 blacks. Heerfordt syndrome is present in 4.1–5.6% of those with sarcoidosis.

If a contracture is less than 30 degrees, it may not interfere with normal functioning. The common treatment is splinting and occupational therapy. Surgery is the last option for most cases as the result may not be satisfactory.

Diagnosis is made based on features as well as by the very early onset of serious eye and ear disease. Because Marshall syndrome is an autosomal dominant hereditary disease, physicians can also note the characteristic appearance of the biological parent of the child. There are no tests for Stickler syndrome or Marshall syndrome. Some families with Stickler syndrome have been shown to have mutations in the Type II collagen gene on chromosome 1. However, other families do not show the linkage to the collagen gene. It is an area of active research, also the genetic testing being expensive supports that the diagnosis is made depending on the features.

Diagnosis of Harlequin syndrome is made when the individual has consistent signs and symptoms of the condition, therefore, it is made by clinical observation. In addition, a neurologist or primary care physician may require an MRI test to rule out similar disorders such as Horner's syndrome, Adie's syndrome, and Ross' syndrome. In an MRI, a radiologist may observe areas near brain or spinal cord for lesions, or any damage to the nerve endings. It is also important that the clinician rules out traumatic causes by performing autonomic function tests. Such tests includes the following: tilt table test, orthostatic blood pressure measurement, head-up test, valsalva maneuver, thermoregulatory sweat test, tendon reflex test, and electrocardiography (ECG). CT scan of the heart and lungs may also be performed to rule out a structural underlying lesion. The medical history of the individual should be carefully noted.

Initially, the clinical presentation of SDS may appear similar to cystic fibrosis. However, CF can be excluded with a normal chloride in sweat test but faecal elastase as a marker of pancreatic function will be reduced. The variation, intermittent nature, and potential for long-term improvement of some clinical features make this syndrome difficult to diagnose. SDS may present with either malabsorption, or hematological problems. Rarely, SDS may present with skeletal defects, including severe rib cage abnormalities that lead to difficulty in breathing. Diagnosis is generally based on evidence of exocrine pancreatic dysfunction and neutropenia. Skeletal abnormalities and short stature are characteristics that can be used to support the diagnosis. The gene responsible for the disease has been identified and genetic testing is now available. Though useful in diagnostics, a genetic test does not surmount the need for careful clinical assessment and monitoring of all patients.

Many professionals that are likely to be involved in the treatment of those with Stickler's syndrome, include anesthesiologists, oral and maxillofacial surgeons; craniofacial surgeons; ear, nose, and throat specialists, ophthalmologists, optometrists, audiologists, speech pathologists, physical therapists and rheumatologists.

Diagnosis is visual with measurement of spot size. The number of spots can have clinical significance for diagnosis of associated disorders such as Neurofibromatosis type I. Greater than or equal to 6 spots of at least 5mm in diameter in pre-pubertal children and at least 15mm in post-pubertal individuals is one of the major diagnostic criteria for NF1.

Café au lait spots can be removed with lasers. Results are variable as the spots are often not completely removed or can come back after treatment. Often, a test spot is treated first to help predict the likelihood of treatment success.

More than 80% of children with Patau syndrome die within the first year of life. Children with the mosaic variation are usually affected to a lesser extent. In a retrospective Canadian study of 174 children with trisomy 13, median survival time was 12.5 days. One and ten year survival was 19.8% and 12.9% respectively.

According to the Williams Syndrome Association, diagnosis of Williams syndrome begins with recognition of physical symptoms and markers, which is followed by a confirmatory genetic test. The physical signs that often indicate a suspected case of Williams syndrome include puffiness around the eyes, a long philtrum, and a pattern in the iris. Physiological symptoms that often contribute to a Williams syndrome diagnosis are cardiovascular problems, particularly aortic or pulmonary stenosis, as well as feeding disturbance in infants. Developmental delays are often taken as an initial sign of the syndrome, as well.

If a physician suspects a case of Williams syndrome, the diagnosis is confirmed using one of two possible genetic tests: micro-array analysis or the fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) test. The FISH test examines chromosome #7 and probes for the existence of two copies of the elastin gene. Since 98-99% of individuals with Williams syndrome lack half of the 7q11.23 region of chromosome #7, where the elastin gene is located, the presence of only one copy of the gene is a strong sign of the syndrome. This confirmatory genetic test has been validated in epidemiological studies of the syndrome, and has been demonstrated to be a more effective method of identifying Williams syndrome than previous methods, which often relied on the presence of cardiovascular problems and facial features (which, while common, are not always present).

Some diagnostic studies suggest that reliance on facial features to identify Williams syndrome may cause a misdiagnosis of the condition. Among the more reliable features suggestive of Williams are congenital heart disease, periorbital fullness ("puffy" eyes), and the presence of a long smooth philtrum. Less reliable signs of the syndrome include anteverted nostrils, a wide mouth, and an elongated neck. Researchers indicate that even with significant clinical experience, it is difficult to reliably identify Williams syndrome based on facial features alone.

In patients that have already been diagnosed with sarcoidosis, Heerfordt syndrome can be inferred from the major symptoms of the syndrome, which include parotitis, fever, and facial nerve palsy. In cases of parotitis, ultrasound-guided biopsy is used to exclude the possibility of lymphoma. There are many possible causes of facial nerve palsy, including Lyme disease, HIV, Melkersson–Rosenthal syndrome, schwannoma, and Bell's palsy. Heerfordt syndrome exhibits spontaneous remission. Treatments for sarcoidosis include corticosteroids and immunosuppressive drugs.

In terms of the diagnosis of Romano–Ward syndrome the following is done to ascertain the condition(the "Schwartz Score" helps in so doing):

- Exercise test

- ECG

- Family history