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.

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

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.

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.

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.

In terms of diagnosing Bannayan–Riley–Ruvalcaba syndrome there is no current method outside the physical characteristics that may be present as signs/symptoms. There are, however, multiple molecular genetics tests (and cytogenetic test) to determine Bannayan–Riley–Ruvalcaba syndrome.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

The original report was of a family in Cardiff, United Kingdom. There are subsequent reports of patients from the USA, France, Australia, UAE, India and from Cuba.

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.

It can be detected by the naked eye as well as dental or skull X-Ray testing.

The diagnosis of Muenke syndrome is suspected bases on abnormal skull shape and a diagnosis of coronal craniosynostosis. In 2006, Agochukwu and her colleagues concluded that “A distinct Muenke syndrome phenotype includes: uni or bilateral coronal synostosis, midface hypoplasia, broad toes, and brachydactyly.” Due to phenotypic overlap and/or mild phenotypes, clinical differentiation of this syndrome may be difficult. The suspected diagnosis is confirmed by a blood test to check for gene mutation. To establish the extent of disease in an individual diagnosed with Muenke syndrome, various evaluations are recommended.

In terms of treatment/management one should observe what signs or symptoms are present and therefore treat those as there is no other current guideline. The affected individual should be monitored for cancer of:

- Thyroid

- Breast

- Renal

It is likely that this syndrome is inherited in an autosomal dominant fashion, however there may be a recessive form with hypotonia and developmental delay.

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.

Hay–Wells syndrome is also known as AEC syndrome; this is short for "ankyloblepharon–ectodermal dysplasia–clefting syndrome", "ankyloblepharon filiforme adnatum–ectodermal dysplasia–cleft palate syndrome", "ankyloblepharon–ectodermal defects–cleft lip/palate (AEC) syndrome", "ankyloblepharon–ectodermal defect–cleft lip and/or palate syndrome", or "ankyloblepharon ectodermal dysplasia and clefting". Hay–Wells syndrome, or Ankyloblepharon-Ectodermal Dysplasia-Clefting (AEC) syndrome, is one of over one-hundred forms of ectodermal dysplasia; a collection of inherited diseases that cause atypical development of nails, glands, teeth, and hair. Males and females are equally affected by Hay–Wells syndrome. No demographic has been shown to be especially susceptible to the syndrome. In the United States, Hay-Wells like syndromes occur in only one in 100,000 births. Symptoms are apparent at birth, or become apparent when atypical development of teeth occurs. Major symptoms of Hay–Wells syndrome include: sparse hair and eyelashes, missing teeth, cleft palate, cleft lip with fusing of the upper and lower eyelids, and deformed nails. Therefore, a diagnosis of Hay–Wells syndrome is largely based upon the physical clinical presentation of the patient.

Some people may have some mental slowness, but children with this condition often have good social skills. Some males may have problems with fertility.

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.

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.

Females are affected more than males, and the condition occurs in permanent (adult) teeth more than deciduous (baby teeth or milk teeth).

In HWS the hair is coarse and sparse, eyelashes are sparse or absent, nails may be absent or malformed, and teeth may be small and malformed. There may be fewer than normal sweat glands and they may produce little sweat, a condition known generally as hypohidrosis. Chronic inflammatory dermatitis of the scalp is a common symptom.

Two features differentiate HWS from other ectodermal displasias. First, the syndrome is associated with cleft palate, and, less often, cleft lip. Second, the edges of the upper and lower eyelid grow bands of fibrous tissue, often causing them to be fused together. This condition in the eyelids is called "ankyloblepharon filiforme adnatum".