Biomedical subjects

Clara D M van Karnebeek

Publications and source records attributed to Clara D M van Karnebeek.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2005

Diagnostic investigations in individuals with mental retardation: a systematic literature review of their usefulness.

There are no guidelines available for diagnostic studies in patients with mental retardation (MR) established in an evidence-based manner. Here we report such study, based on information from original studies on the results with respect to detected significant anomalies (yield) of six major diagnostic investigations, and evaluate whether the yield differs depending on setting, MR severity, and gender. Results for cytogenetic studies showed the mean yield of chromosome aberrations in classical cytogenetics to be 9.5% (variation: 5.4% in school populations to 13.3% in institute populations; 4.1% in borderline-mild MR to 13.3% in moderate-profound MR; more frequent structural anomalies in females). The median yield of subtelomeric studies was 4.4% (also showing female predominance). For fragile X screening, yields were 5.4% (cytogenetic studies) and 2.0% (molecular studies) (higher yield in moderate-profound MR; checklist use useful). In metabolic investigations, the mean yield of all studies was 1.0% (results depending on neonatal screening programmes; in individual populations higher yield for specific metabolic disorders). Studies on neurological examination all showed a high yield (mean 42.9%; irrespective of setting, degree of MR, and gender). The yield of neuroimaging studies for abnormalities was 30.0% (higher yield if performed on an indicated basis) and the yield for finding a diagnosis based on neuroradiological studies only was 1.3% (no data available on value of negative findings). A very high yield was found for dysmorphologic examination (variation 39-81%). The data from this review allow conclusions for most types of diagnostic investigations in MR patients. Recommendations for further studies are provided.

Chromosome Aberrations↗

PubMed2005

Etiology of mental retardation in children referred to a tertiary care center: a prospective study.

A prospective assessment following a step-wise protocol in 281 patients with unexplained cognitive delay was used to assess diagnostic possibilities. Diagnostic procedures were complex and required a multidisciplinary approach. One third of diagnoses was established based on clinical history and physical exam only; for another third, clinical history and physical exam provided essential clues for additional investigations; and a third were established by additional investigations only. The likelihood to reach a diagnosis did not depend on the severity of mental retardation. We found that in a tertiary care center, a diagnosis can be established in 1 out of every 2 patients. Clinical history and physical examination are the most important instruments to reach a diagnosis.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2003

Phenotypic abnormalities: terminology and classification.

Clinical morphology has proved essential for the successful delineation of hundreds of syndromes and as a powerful instrument for detecting (candidate) genes (Gorlin et al. [2001]; Syndromes of the Head and Neck; Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1 p]. The major approach to reach this has been careful clinical evaluations of patients, focused on congenital anomalies. A similar careful physical examination performed in patients, who have been treated for childhood cancer, may allow detection of concurrent patterns of anomalies and provide clues for causative genes. In the past, several studies were performed describing the prevalence of anomalies in patients with cancer. However, in most studies, it was not possible to indicate the biologic relevance of the recorded anomalies, or to judge their relative importance. Are the detected anomalies common variants, and should they thus be regarded as normal, or are they minor anomalies or true abnormalities, indicating a possible developmental cause? Classification of items in the categories of common variants (disturbances of phenogenesis with a prevalence >4%), minor anomalies (disturbances of phenogenesis with a prevalence </=4%), and malformations (disturbances of embryogenesis) should allow weighing the importance of the scored items in the population under study, and should facilitate assessment of developmental disturbances (if any) in a study group. The lack of published consensus in the literature led us to produce a classification list with a twofold goal. First, we wanted to enhance uniformity in the scoring and classification of apparently abnormal physical findings by a nomenclature for errors of morphogenesis detectable on surface examination, and secondly a uniform classification system. This should allow investigators to evaluate systematically the presence of patterns in phenotypic anomalies, in the general population, and in patients with various disorders, suspected to be a developmental anomaly. Also, normal values may be obtained this way. Second, the list will allow a determination of the importance of the collected symptoms in a study population. We tested the feasibility of the application of the classification list in a study population: the list was piloted in a group of patients who have had cancer as a child, to detect patterns of anomalies related to specific types of tumors.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

Further delineation of the chromosome 14q terminal deletion syndrome.

A patient with hypotonia, blepharophimosis, ptosis, a bulbous nose, a long philtrum, upturned corners of the mouth, and mild developmental delay was found to have a small subtelomeric deletion of the long arm of chromosome 14 (q32.31-qter). In comparing her phenotype with previously reported patients with similar 14q deletions, due to either a linear deletion or to a ring chromosome 14, a clinically recognizable terminal 14q microdeletion syndrome was evident. Due to the limited number of cases reported, it was not possible to assign specific features to specific regions of terminal 14q. The comparison of features in cases with a linear deletion of 14qter (n = 19) to those in cases with a deletion due to a ring chromosome 14 (n = 23), both with the same breakpoint in 14q, showed that seizures and retinitis pigmentosa have been found only in patients with ring chromosomes. Several hypotheses are put forward to explain this difference: mitotic instability of ring chromosomes; a telomere position effect in ring chromosomes in which the 14p telomere silences nearby gene(s) on the q-arm; and dose-dependent gene(s) involved in seizures and retinitis pigmentosa located on the short arm of chromosome 14. In our opinion, only seizures may be explained by the mitotic instability of ring chromosomes, while both seizures and retinitis pigmentosa may be explained by silencing of gene(s) on 14q by the 14p telomere; the third hypothesis seems unlikely to explain either symptom.

Abnormalities, Multiple↗