Made by DATEXIS (Data Science and Text-based Information Systems) at Beuth University of Applied Sciences Berlin
Deep Learning Technology: Sebastian Arnold, Betty van Aken, Paul Grundmann, Felix A. Gers and Alexander Löser. Learning Contextualized Document Representations for Healthcare Answer Retrieval. The Web Conference 2020 (WWW'20)
Funded by The Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy; Grant: 01MD19013D, Smart-MD Project, Digital Technologies
Imaging by ultrasonography, MRCP, or CT scan usually make the diagnosis. MRCP can be used to define the lesion anatomically prior to surgery.
Occasionally Mirizzi's syndrome is diagnosed or confirmed on ERCP when requested to alleviate obstructive jaundice or cholangitis by means of an endoscopically placed stent, or when USS has been wrongly reported as choledocolithiasis.
Simple cholecystectomy is suitable for type I patients. For types II–IV, subtotal cholecystectomy can be performed to avoid damage to the main bile ducts. Cholecystectomy and bilioenteric anastomosis may be required. Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy has shown good outcome in some studies.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Diagnosis depends on the clinical scenario. However, karyotyping is an essential test for diagnosis.
In terms of diagnosis for this condition, the following methods/tests are available:
- Endoscopic
- CT scan
- Serum endocrine autoantibody screen
- Histologic test
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
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.
Diagnosis involves consideration of physical features and genetic testing. Presence of split uvula is a differentiating characteristic from Marfan Syndrome, as well as the severity of the heart defects. Loeys-Dietz Syndrome patients have more severe heart involvement and it is advised that they be treated for enlarged aorta earlier due to the increased risk of early rupture in Loeys-Dietz patients. Because different people express different combinations of symptoms and the syndrome was identified in 2005, many doctors may not be aware of its existence, although clinical guidelines were released in 2014-2015. Dr. Harold Dietz, Dr. Bart Loeys, and Dr. Kenneth Zahka are considered experts in this condition.
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.
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
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
Liver function tests are normal. Pigmented granules are not seen in the hepatocytes of individuals with Rotor syndrome.
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.
There is considerable research into the causes, diagnosis and treatments for FGIDs. Diet, microbiome, genetics, neuromuscular function and immunological response all interact. Heightened mast cell activation has been proposed to be a common factor among FGIDs, contributing to visceral hypersensitivity as well as epithelial, neuromuscular, and motility dysfunction.
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.
Immunohistochemistry is now being used more often to diagnose patients likely to have Muir–Torre syndrome. Sebaceous neoplasms are only infrequently encountered, and immunohistochemistry is reliable and readily available, so researchers have recommended its use. Routine immunohistochemical detection of DNA mismatch repair proteins help identify hereditary DNA mismatch repair deficiency.
Treatment of Muir–Torre syndrome normally consists of oral isotretinoin. The drug has been found to prevent tumor development.
Patients with Muir–Torre syndrome should follow the same stringent screening for colorectal carcinoma and other malignancies as patients with Lynch syndrome. This includes frequent and early colonoscopies, mammograms, dermatologic evaluation, and imaging of the abdomen and pelvis.
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.
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.
One possible cause of Harlequin syndrome is a lesion to the preganglionic or postganglionic cervical sympathetic fibers and parasympathetic neurons of the ciliary ganglion. It is also believed that torsion (twisting) of the thoracic spine can cause blockage of the anterior radicular artery leading to Harlequin syndrome. The sympathetic deficit on the denervated side causes the flushing of the opposite side to appear more pronounced. It is unclear whether or not the response of the undamaged side was normal or excessive, but it is believed that it could be a result of the body attempting to compensate for the damaged side and maintain homeostasis.
Since the cause and mechanism of Harlequin syndrome is still unknown, there is no way to prevent this syndrome.
Muir–Torre was observed to occur in 14 of 50 families (28%) and in 14 of 152 individuals (9.2%) with Lynch syndrome, also known as HNPCC.
The 2 major MMR proteins involved are hMLH1 and hMSH2. Approximately 70% of tumors associated with the MTS have microsatellite instability. While germline disruption of hMLH1 and hMSH2 is evenly distributed in HNPCC, disruption of hMSH2 is seen in greater than 90% of MTS patients.
Gastrointestinal and genitourinary cancers are the most common internal malignancies. Colorectal cancer is the most common visceral neoplasm in Muir–Torre syndrome patients.
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 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