Journals / İstanbul Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi / 2018 / Cilt: 81 - Sayı: 4

CLINICAL CLASSIFICATION OF RADIAL RAY DEFECTS AND RESEARCH INTO ETIOPATHOGENESIS

RADİYAL IŞIN DEFEKTLERİNİN KLİNİK SINIFLANDIRMASI VE ETYOPATOGENEZİNİN ARAŞTIRILMASI

Pages
127–138
Publication Date
2018-12-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Moreover, chromosomal abnormalities must always be considered in the differential diagnosis and excluded before gene-panel screening.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:DOI: 10.26650/IUITFD.427250Objective: Radial ray defects (RRDs) are the most common congenital abnormality of the upper extremities, with a prevalence of 1:30,000. 70% of RRDs are syndromic or accompanied by additional malformations, whereas 30% are in isolated form.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Methods: 48 probands from 37 families, referred for genetic consultation due to RRD, between the years of 2004–2014, were evaluated by cytogenetic and molecular tools following clinical examinations. 31 probands, with normal karyotype, were screened for 43 RRD associated genes of 14 syndromes by using in-house-designed targeted NGS gene-panel.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Moreover, chromosomal abnormalities must always be considered in the differential diagnosis and excluded before gene-panel screening.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2004–2014 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Fanconi anemisi · radial ışın defektleri · yeni nesil dizileme

Abstract

DOI: 10.26650/IUITFD.427250Objective: Radial ray defects (RRDs) are the most common congenital abnormality of the upper extremities, with a prevalence of 1:30,000. 70% of RRDs are syndromic or accompanied by additional malformations, whereas 30% are in isolated form. Definitive diagnosis is critical for follow-up and provides an opportunity for prenatal diagnosis. The aim of this study was to provide a guide for the differential diagnosis of patients with RRD via contributing to their molecular diagnosis by constructing a next-generation sequencing (NGS) gene-panel test. Materials and Methods: 48 probands from 37 families, referred for genetic consultation due to RRD, between the years of 2004–2014, were evaluated by cytogenetic and molecular tools following clinical examinations. 31 probands, with normal karyotype, were screened for 43 RRD associated genes of 14 syndromes by using in-house-designed targeted NGS gene-panel. Results: Chromosomal abnormalities [a trisomy 18 and a familial reciprocal translocation t(2;12)(q31;q24.3)] in two families and mutations in related genes (SF3B4, SALL4, TBX5, FANCA) in four families were known before the initiation of this study. In remaining 31 probands, five families identified to have six different mutations in four different genes (FANCA, NIPBL, ESCO2, BRIP1). Conclusion: Chromosomal abnormalities in two of the 37 families (5.4%) and gene mutations in nine of the 37 families (24.3%) were identified. Our study demonstrated that an in-house-designed targeted NGS containing 43 genes made considerable contribution to the diagnosis of RRD. Moreover, chromosomal abnormalities must always be considered in the differential diagnosis and excluded before gene-panel screening.

Özet

DOI: 10.26650/IUITFD.427250

🔖

Cite This Article

AVCI, Ş., TOKSOY, G., BAĞIROVA, G., ALTUNOĞLU, U., KARAMAN, B., BAŞARAN, S., KAYSERİLİ, H., UYGUNER, Z. O. (2018). CLINICAL CLASSIFICATION OF RADIAL RAY DEFECTS AND RESEARCH INTO ETIOPATHOGENESIS. İstanbul Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 81 - Sayı: 4, 127–138. https://ajindex.com/articles/48437

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Ashhurst DE. The influence of mechanical conditions on the healing of experimental fractures in the rabbit: a microscopical study. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 1986;313(1161):271 - 302
  2. Bellaiche N. Imaging in oral implantology. In: Scortecchi GM, Misch CE, Benner KU (eds). Implants and Restorative Dentistry. London, England: Martin Dunitz Ltd, 2001;181
  3. Bouckenooghe T, Remacle C, Reusens B. Is taurine a functional nutrient? Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care 2006;9(6):728-33
  4. Buckwalter JA. Musculoskeletal tissue healing. In: Weinstein SL, Buckwalter JA (eds). Turek’s Orthopaedics, Principles and Their Applications, 6th ed. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2005;57-63
  5. Cetinus E, Kilinc M, Uzel M, et al. Does long-term ischemia affect the oxidant status during fracture healing? Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2005;125(6):376-80
  6. Demers LM. Bone specific alkaline phosphatase. In: Eastell R, Baumann M, Hoyle NR, Wieczorek L (eds). Bone Markers Biochemical and Clinical Perspectives, London, England: Martin Dunitz Ltd, 2001;57-8
  7. Durak K, Sönmez G, Sarisozen B, Özkan S, Kaya M, Öztürk C. Histological assessment of the effect of alpha-tocopherol on fracture healing in rabbits. J Int Med Res 2003;31(1):26-30
  8. Duygulu F, Yakan B, Karaoğlu S, Kutlubay R, Karahan OI, Özturk A. The effect of zymosan and the protective effect of various antioxidants on fracture healing in rats. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2007;127(7):493-501
  9. Frost HM. The biology of fracture healing. An overview for clinicians. Part I. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1989;248:283-93
  10. Garrett IR, Boyce BF, Oreffo RO, Bonewald L, Poser J, Mundy GR. Oxygen-derived free radicals stimulate osteoclastic bone resorption in rodent bone in vitro and in vivo. J Clin Invest 1990;85(3):632-9
  11. Göktürk E, Turgut A, Baycu C, Günal I, Seber S, Gülbaş Z. Oxygen free radicals impair fracture healing in rats. Acta Orthop Scand 1995;66(5):473-5
  12. Goldberg VM, Powell A, Shaffer JW, Zika J, Bos GD, Heiple KG. Bone grafting: role of histocompatibility in transplantation. J Orthop Res 1985;3(4):389-404
  13. Halıcı M, Öner M, Güney A, Canöz Ö, Narin F, Halıcı C. Melatonin promotes fracture healing in the rat model. Eklem Hastalik Cerrahisi 2010;21(3):172-7
  14. Huo MH, Troiano NW, Pelker RR, Gundberg CM, Friedlaender GE. The influence of ibuprofen on fracture repair: biomechanical, biochemical, histologic, and histomorphometric parameters in rats. J Orthop Res 1991;9(3):383-9