Prenatal sonographic findings in confirmed cases of Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome.
4p deletion syndrome
4p-
Greek warrior helmet
Microcephaly
Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome
Journal
BMC pregnancy and childbirth
ISSN: 1471-2393
Titre abrégé: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967799
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 Apr 2022
15 Apr 2022
Historique:
received:
17
11
2021
accepted:
07
04
2022
entrez:
16
4
2022
pubmed:
17
4
2022
medline:
20
4
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome (WHS) is a common genetic condition and prenatal diagnosis is difficult due to heterogeneous expression of this syndrome and rather non-specific ultrasound findings. Objective of this study was to examine the prenatal ultrasound findings in fetuses with Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome (WHS). Retrospective assessment of 18 pregnancies that were seen at three tertiary referral centers (Universities of Bonn, Tuebingen and Nuernberg / Germany). Findings of prenatal ultrasound examinations, genetic results and outcome were compared. Additionally, findings of our study were compared to previous small case series from the literature and then compared to data on postnatal frequencies and abnormalities in affected patients. Median gestational age at the time of examination was 23 + 1 weeks' (range: 13 + 4 to 29 + 1 weeks') with female-to-male ratio of > 2.5:1. Most frequent ultrasound findings were facial abnormalities, symmetric IUGR and microcephaly that presented in 94.4, 83.3 and 72.2% of cases, respectively. The combination of microcephaly and hypoplastic nasal bone was a particularly characteristic finding. Growth retardation presented in all fetuses > 20 weeks, but not below. Other frequent abnormalities included cardiac anomalies in 50 and single umbilical artery (SUA) in 44.4% of fetuses. WHS should be considered in the presence of symmetric IUGR together with microcephaly, hypoplastic nasal bone and facial abnormalities on prenatal ultrasound. Genetic testing by chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) is strongly recommended in this context.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome (WHS) is a common genetic condition and prenatal diagnosis is difficult due to heterogeneous expression of this syndrome and rather non-specific ultrasound findings. Objective of this study was to examine the prenatal ultrasound findings in fetuses with Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome (WHS).
METHODS
METHODS
Retrospective assessment of 18 pregnancies that were seen at three tertiary referral centers (Universities of Bonn, Tuebingen and Nuernberg / Germany). Findings of prenatal ultrasound examinations, genetic results and outcome were compared. Additionally, findings of our study were compared to previous small case series from the literature and then compared to data on postnatal frequencies and abnormalities in affected patients.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Median gestational age at the time of examination was 23 + 1 weeks' (range: 13 + 4 to 29 + 1 weeks') with female-to-male ratio of > 2.5:1. Most frequent ultrasound findings were facial abnormalities, symmetric IUGR and microcephaly that presented in 94.4, 83.3 and 72.2% of cases, respectively. The combination of microcephaly and hypoplastic nasal bone was a particularly characteristic finding. Growth retardation presented in all fetuses > 20 weeks, but not below. Other frequent abnormalities included cardiac anomalies in 50 and single umbilical artery (SUA) in 44.4% of fetuses.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
WHS should be considered in the presence of symmetric IUGR together with microcephaly, hypoplastic nasal bone and facial abnormalities on prenatal ultrasound. Genetic testing by chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) is strongly recommended in this context.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35428251
doi: 10.1186/s12884-022-04665-4
pii: 10.1186/s12884-022-04665-4
pmc: PMC9013087
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
327Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2018 Aug;298(2):289-295
pubmed: 29808250
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2003 Feb;21(2):152-5
pubmed: 12601837
Hum Mol Genet. 1997 Feb;6(2):317-24
pubmed: 9063753
Adv Pediatr. 2001;48:75-113
pubmed: 11480768
Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2015 Sep;169(3):216-23
pubmed: 26239400
Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2008 Nov 15;148C(4):270-4
pubmed: 18932125
Mol Cytogenet. 2012 Feb 28;5:12
pubmed: 22373435
Case Rep Genet. 2012;2012:878796
pubmed: 23227376
Am J Hum Genet. 2003 Mar;72(3):590-7
pubmed: 12563561
Pediatr Cardiol. 2013 Jun;34(5):1244-6
pubmed: 22639003
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2013 Jun;26(9):941-2
pubmed: 23398546
Prenat Diagn. 1991 Feb;11(2):129-32
pubmed: 2062819
Z Geburtshilfe Neonatol. 2016 Oct;220(5):195-199
pubmed: 27203859
Eur J Hum Genet. 2008 Jan;16(1):45-52
pubmed: 17726485
J Med Genet. 2008 Feb;45(2):71-80
pubmed: 17873117
PLoS One. 2020 Aug 26;15(8):e0238245
pubmed: 32845907
Am J Med Genet A. 2016 Oct;170(10):2540-50
pubmed: 27287194
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2018 Jun;225:19-21
pubmed: 29626710
Eur J Hum Genet. 2000 Jul;8(7):519-26
pubmed: 10909852
Eur J Hum Genet. 2014 Apr;22(4):464-70
pubmed: 23963300
Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2008 Nov 15;148C(4):257-69
pubmed: 18932124
Am J Med Genet A. 2010 Nov;152A(11):2891-4
pubmed: 20830802
Trends Genet. 2005 Mar;21(3):188-95
pubmed: 15734578
Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2020 May;59(3):425-431
pubmed: 32416892
Am J Med Genet. 2000 Sep 18;94(3):254-61
pubmed: 10995514