Hemifacial Microsomia

¿Que es Hemifacial Microsomia?

La microsomía hemifacial (un lado de la cara) es una enfermedad rara, cuya característica definitoria es el subdesarrollo de la mitad de la cara. Este subdesarrollo puede ser leve o severo. Se sabe que varía de un individuo a otro. Sin embargo, en cada individuo diagnosticado, una mandíbula inferior sin desarrollar es una característica constante.

Esta síndrome también se conoce como:
Facio-auriculo-vertebral síndrome Secuencia Facioauriculovertebral Facioauriculovertebral síndrome Secuencia favorita Goldenhar Síndrome Hemifacial Microsomia Hemifacial Microsomia; HFM Espectro óculo-auriculo-vertebral relacionado con MYT1 (OAVS) Displasia de Oav OAVS Oculo-auriculo-vertebral síndrome Displasia Oculoauriculovertebral Espectro Oculoauriculovertebral; Oavs Oculoauriculovertebral síndrome

¿Qué causan los cambios genéticos Hemifacial Microsomia?

Existe alguna evidencia que sugiere que se trata de una afección hereditaria, ya que se han informado casos del síndrome dentro de la misma familia. Sin embargo, aún no se ha identificado el gen exacto que puede ser responsable.

La investigación actual sugiere que el síndrome es causado por una interrupción en el desarrollo del feto durante las primeras 6 semanas de embarazo. Aún se desconoce si los factores ambientales también pueden contribuir a esto.

El modo exacto de herencia se desconocía en el momento en que se registró esta entrada.

¿Cuales son los principales síntomas de Hemifacial Microsomia?

Los principales síntomas del síndrome afectan la cara. Las mandíbulas inferiores y superiores subdesarrolladas son la característica principal. Así como una boca que se inclina hacia arriba. Estas características, a su vez, pueden dificultar la masticación de las personas.

Algunas personas tienen la mejilla y la frente aplanadas en el lado subdesarrollado de la cara y una cuenca del ojo también puede ser más pequeña. La asimetría facial general es común y esto puede resultar en una pérdida de sensibilidad en la mitad afectada de la cara y una debilidad en los músculos.

Otras características relacionadas con la cara incluyen exceso de piel alrededor de las orejas, oído subdesarrollado y ocasionalmente ausente, estructuras del oído interno ausentes o subdesarrolladas y, como resultado, también pérdida auditiva.

El síndrome es un trastorno del espectro, lo que significa que cada parte del rostro afectada puede variar en su gravedad. Los síntomas también pueden variar dentro de las familias afectadas por el síndrome.

¿Cómo se hace la prueba a alguien? Hemifacial Microsomia?

La prueba inicial para Hemifacial Microsomia (Goldernhar síndrome) puede comenzar con la selección del análisis facial, a través de la FDNA Telehealth plataforma de telegenética, que puede identificar los marcadores clave de la síndrome y describa la necesidad de realizar más pruebas. Seguirá una consulta con un asesor genético y luego con un genetista.

Sobre la base de esta consulta clínica con un genetista, se compartirán las diferentes opciones para las pruebas genéticas y se buscará el consentimiento para realizar más pruebas.

Información médica sobre Hemifacial Microsomia

This condition affects the face bilaterally, but asymmetrically. The ear is small, often with preauricular ear tags in a line between the front of the ear and the side of the mouth, and there is macrostomia and failure of formation of the mandibular ramus and condyle. Various Tessier clefts (30, 4, 7, 9) - Vendramini-Pittoli et al., 2015). An epibulbar dermoid is usually insisted on as a diagnostic feature. Where this is absent, and both sides of the face are affected, the term first and second branchial arch syndrome is perhaps preferable. Where the face is affected only on one side without an epibulbar dermoid then the term Hemifacial Microsomia has been used. Okajima et., (1996) studied 592 patients with microtia and found that males were affected more often (65%) and the right side was more often more affected (58.4%). Six patients were thought to have Treacher Collins syndrome and 27 patients were thought to have a first and second branchial arch syndrome.
Colobomas of the eyelid (including the upper lid - Seah et al., 2002) do occur. A case with optic nerve hypoplasia and an optic nerve coloboma was reported by Menon et al., (2004), and one with trigeminal nerve hypoplasia and corneal hypoesthesia by Villanueva et al., (2005). The patient reported by Chaudhuri et al., (2007) had a morning glory disc anomaly, with bilateral choroidal colobomas. Unilateral sclerocornea and trachial stenosis was reported by Furtado et al., (2011). Shimizu et al., (2004) reported an unusual case with a supernumerary auricle on the lateral canthus, and D'Alessandro et al., (2006) had a case with a horseshoe lung. A patient with polyotia and a bifid tongue was reported by Konas et al., (2006). Unilateral craniosynostosis was reported by Terry and Ascherman, 2006). A patient with a fibroepithelial polyp arising from the epibulbar dermoid was described by Seymenoglu et al., (2013). This was an usual case in that there was thumb polydactyly.
The case reported by Ghi et al., (2008) is difficult to place. There were preauricular tags, an epibulbar dermoid and a coloboma of the upper lid and early ossification of one coronal suture. But what makes this case unusual was the presence of a huge orbital cyst that replaced the eye.
Cervical vertebral anomalies are common and should be looked for. Cardiac defects have been reported in 5-58% of cases - Kumar et al., (1993) review the types of lesion. Two-thirds of anomalies are either tetralogy of Fallot or VSD, however Kumar et al., (1993) found a wide variety of lesions including a double outlet right ventricle, pulmonary atresia, and infradiaphragmatic total anomalous pulmonary venous drainage. Rad (2014) reported a case with right circumflex aortic arch, severe coarctation and a vascular ring. Maat-Kievit et al., (1994) reported a case with total situs inversus. Reid and Huff (1990) reported a similar association where the child had some additional features of VATER association. Lin et al., (1998) review cases of oculoauriculovertebral syndrome associated with abnormalities of situs. They note the association with maternal diabetes, as do Ewart-Toland et al., (2000). Zelante et al., (1997) reported another case with features of VATER association and a complex congenital heart defect. Bergmann et al., (2003) discuss the overlap between VACTERL association, Hemifacial Microsomia and axial mesodermal dysplasia. Thumb hypoplasia might be a feature (Das et al., 2008, Guzelmansur et al., 2013).
Ozkinay et al., (2003) reported a 10-year-old girl with a sliding type oesophageal hernia and ectopic pancreatic tissue in the stomach with renal agenesis and features of Hemifacial Microsomia. Pridjian et al., (1995) reported a case with mosaic trisomy 22 who had features of Goldenhar syndrome. A further case of Hemifacial Microsomia associated with partial duplication 22q was reported by Hathout et al., (1998). De Ravel et al., (2001) reported one case with features of the condition who had mosaic trisomy 9 and a further case with mosaic trisomy 22. Choong et al., (2003) reported a case with features of Goldenhar syndrome and Cri du Chat syndrome with a terminal 5p14 deletion. Josifova et al., (2004) reported a sib pair with an unbalanced t(5;8)(p15.31;p23.1) translocation. 5p14-5 seems interesting! Dabir and Morrison (2005) reported a case with trisomy 10p.
Severe central nervous system involvement is rare but hydrocephalus, microcephalus, encephalocele and severe retardation have been described. This association is well reviewed by Schrander-Stumpel et al., (1992) who point out that intracranial lesions are more frequently associated with cleft lip/palate, and anophthalmia or microphthalmia. A case with unilateral anophthalmia, microtia and severe obstructive hydrocephalus was reported by Kumar et al., (2009). Inci and Saglam (1995) reported a case with syringohydromyelia. Michaud and Sheridan (1974) reported a similar case. Cohen et al., (1995) carried out detailed psychological assessments on 24 children. 58% of children scored 2 SD below the mean in at least one domain of development.
Vento et al., (1991) introduced the OMENS classification standing for orbit, mandible, ear, cranial nerves and soft tissues. In each of these categories the abnormalities are graded from 0 (normal) to 3 (most severe). Horgan et al., (1995) used this system to analyse the defects in 121 patients and found that patients with extracraniofacial structural defects had higher OMENS grades.
Van Bever et al., (1992) reported eight Brazilian cases with rarer manifestations of the condition including Rokitansky sequence, dextrocardia, fibrous dysplasia of the bones, hydrocephalus and porencephalic cysts (see above), radial defects and hemimelia. Pillay et al., (2005) also reported a case with the Rokitansky sequence, a Dandy-Walker malformation and an absent thymus. This seems like something else. Maymon et al., (2001) reported a 20 week old fetus with right pulmonary agenesis associated with right microtia. These rarer features can lead to overlap with CHARGE, MURCS and VATER associations (Van Meter and Weaver, 1996). Sutphen et al., (1995) reviewed 60 cases and found that three had tracheo-oesophageal fistula or oesophageal atresia. Inglis et al., (1992) and Lin et al., (1995) reported cases with vertically fused tracheal cartilages. Ghose et al., (1992) reported a case with Peters' anomaly. Three cases with a portal vein cavernoma, presenting with extrahepatic portal hypertension, are known (Stringer et al., 2005).
Inheritance is uncertain - irregular dominant families have been described (Herrmann and Opitz, 1969; Robinow et al., 1986; Regenbogen et al., 1982; Rollnick et al., 1983; Stoll et al., 1998). Some of these families include convincing cases of Goldenhar syndrome (Singer et al., 1994, Tasse et al., 2007). On the other hand several discordant monozygotic twins have also been described (Boles et al., 1987; Burck et al., 1983; Connor and Fernandez, 1984; Ebbesen et al., 1982; Kawira et al., 1984; Setzer et al., 1981). Ferraris et al., (1999) reported a baby with features of Goldenhar syndrome in one of triplets derived from in vitro fertilisation. A similar case in one of triplets was reported by Roesch et al., (2001). Harris et al., (1996) studied the epidemiology of anotia and microtia and found a prevalence of between 0.76 and 2.35 per 10,000. Between 30-50% had associated malformations and approximately 15% of these cases had Goldenhar syndrome. Affected monozygotic twins (with slightly different manifestations) were reported by Touliatou et al., (2006), and sibs with Hemifacial Microsomia by Park and Tatum (2007). Nine familial cases were reported by Vendramini-Pittoli and Kokitsu-Nakata (2009). It should be noted that epibulbar dermoids did not occur, and that relatives were less severely affected.
Mastroiacovo et al., (1995) review the epidemiology and genetics of microtia. In the Italian population the prevalence was about 1.5 per 10000 with 22% of cases having anotia and 66% having an isolated ear defect. A significant association with maternal diabetes was noted.
Kelberman et al., (2001) mapped the gene to 14q32 in a large dominant family with a form of Hemifacial Microsomia, however the gene did not map to this position in another family, indicating genetic heterogeneity. Descartes (2006) reported a patient with Goldenhar syndrome and a 5p15.33-pter deletion, and summarized five other patients with Goldenhar syndrome / Hemifacial Microsomia and a 5pter deletion. Kosaki et al., (2007) reported a family in which one member had the Towns-Brooks phenotype, whereas her sister had features of Goldenhar including an epibulbar dermoid. Both had SALL1 mutations.
Note the case reported by Su et al., (2007) with (I think) hemi-facial microsmia (there were no eye abnormalities) with a TCOF1 mutation - there was facial asymmetry, hypoplasia of the left mandibular ramus and mandible, both conductive and sensorineural hearing loss, atresia of the auditory canal and multiple pinnae. Three patients with features compatable with Goldenhar, were found to have 22q11.2 microdeletions (Digilio et al., 2009) and another by Lafay-Cousin et al., (2009) and Xu et al., (2008). see also Balci and Engiz (2011).
Lopez et al. (2016) identified heterozygous mutations in the MYT1 gene in two patients with OAVS. The first patient carried a de novo nonsense mutation. She presented with preauricular and jugal tags, small and dysplastic pinnae on the right side and right epibulbar dermoid, facial asymmetry, vertebral malformations and conductive deafness. Temporal bones CT scan revealed a stenosis of the external auditory canal and an ossicular malformation affecting the incus and the malleus. She also had a ventricular septal defect and epilepsy. At age six, the patient showed normal neurological and growth development. In another patient, the missense mutation was inherited from his father. This boy presented with Hemifacial Microsomia, macrostomia, preauricular tag and dysplastic pinnae and a sacrococcygeal dimple. He had lipoma of filum and low attached spinal cord. His father presented with a progressive bilateral sensorineural hearing loss, myopia and a thoracolumbar scoliosis.
Berenguer et al. (2017) described a family with Hemifacial Microsomia due to heterozygous mutations in the MYT1 gene. Clinical characteristics included unilateral microtia, preauricular tag, ear dysplasia, conductive hearing loss, facial asymmetry, mandibular, malar, and maxillary hypoplasia, vertebral anomalies and septal defects.
A female patient with Hemifacial Microsomia was treated by Cassi et. al. (2017) and treated with an asymmetrical functional activator (AFA) to stimulate the growth of the affected side and consequently to improve symmetry.
A female patient with Oculo-auriculo-vertebral Spectrum (OAVS) was found to have a 1048 kb deletion in the 22q11.2 region by Spineli-Silva et. al. (2017). Clinical characteristics included cleft lip and palate, jejunal stenosis and bilateral hydronephrosis, atrial and ventricular septal defects, flat occiput, low-set ears, bilateral preauricular tags, stenosis of left auditory canal, malar hypoplasia, epicanthus, mild asymmetry of the face, right nasal cleft, and clinodactyly of the 5th finger.
Renkema et. al. (2017) performed a systematic review of vertebral anomalies in Hemifacial Microsomia spectrum. Anomalies included butterfly vertebrae, hemivertebrae, block vertebrae, scoliosis/kyphoscoliosis, spina bifida occulta, occipitalization of the atlas, hypoplastic atlas, platybasia, instability C1–C2, split vertebrae, basilar invagination, accessory vertebrae, rotary subluxation, displaced vertebrae, hypoplastic odontoid, scoliosis/kyphoscoliosis, sacralization, cervical ribs, rib fusion, rib aplasia, rib hypoplasia, and extra ribs.
Brotto et. al. (2017) described imaging characteristics of 35 patients with OAFS. Findings included Internal carotid artery hypoplasia/agenesis and abnormal course, brain abnormalities, internal acoustic canal stenosis/aplasia, cochlear vestibular malformations, facial nerve bony canal anomalies, and oval window atresia.
A review of clinical and cytogenomic characteristics of 72 patients with OAVS was made by Bragagnolo et. al. (2017). Up to date, there is no agreement in the literature for the minimum phenotypic inclusion criteria, but the primary phenotype involves Hemifacial Microsomia with facial asymmetry and microtia. Most cases are sporadic and the aetiology of this syndrome is not well known. Clinical characteristics were microtia (100%), mandible/mandibular hypoplasia (94%), vertebral/rib anomalies (83%), conductive hearing loss (67%), ocular/orbital dystopia (56%), preauricular tags (44%), soft tissue macrostomia (43%), sensorineural hearing loss (42%), cardiac anomalies (39%), central nervous system involvement (22%), cleft lip and/or palate (19%), epibulbar dermoid (15%), genitourinary malformations (14%), coloboma of the upper eyelid (7%), and preauricular sinus (3%). Fifteen CNVs (copy number variations) were found in 13 out of 72 patients without a single candidate genomic region. Recurrent chromosomal imbalances were observed in chromosomes 4 and 22.
Bogusiak et. al. (2017) review is focused on Goldenhar clinical characteristics and management.

* This information is courtesy of the L M D.
If you find a mistake or would like to contribute additional information, please email us at: [email protected]

¡Obtenga un Diagnóstico Genético más rápido y preciso!

Más de 250,000 pacientes analizados con éxito.
No espere años para recibir un diagnóstico. Actúe ahora y ahorre un tiempo valioso.

¡Empieza aqui!

"Nuestro camino hacia el diagnóstico de una enfermedad rara fue un viaje de 5 años que solo puedo describir como intentar hacer un viaje por carretera sin mapa. No sabíamos nuestro punto de partida. No sabíamos nuestro destino. Ahora tenemos esperanza ".

Imagen

Paula y Bobby
Padres de Lillie

¿Qué es FDNA Telehealth?

FDNA Telehealth es una empresa líder en salud digital que brinda un acceso más rápido a análisis genéticos precisos.

Con una tecnología hospitalaria recomendada por genetistas líderes, nuestra plataforma única conecta a los pacientes con expertos en genética para responder a sus preguntas más urgentes y aclarar cualquier inquietud que puedan tener sobre sus Síntomas.

Beneficios de FDNA Telehealth

Icono de FDNA

Credibility

Actualmente, nuestra plataforma la utilizan más del 70% de los genetistas y se ha utilizado para diagnosticar a más de 250,000 pacientes en todo el mundo.

Icono de FDNA

Accesibilidad

FDNA Telehealth ofrece análisis y exámenes faciales en minutos, seguidos de un acceso rápido a consejeros genéticos y genetistas.

Icono de FDNA

Facilidad de uso

Nuestro proceso comienza con un diagnóstico inicial en línea por parte de un consejero genético y sigue con consultas con genetistas y pruebas genéticas.

Icono de FDNA

Exactitud y precisión

Capacidades y tecnología de inteligencia artificial (IA) avanzadas con una tasa de precisión del 90% para un análisis genético más preciso.

Icono de FDNA

Valor por
Dinero

Acceso más rápido a consejeros genéticos, genetistas, pruebas genéticas y un diagnóstico. Tan rápido como en 24 horas si es necesario. Ahorre tiempo y dinero.

Icono de FDNA

Privacidad y seguridad

Garantizamos la máxima protección de todas las imágenes e información del paciente. Sus datos siempre están seguros, protegidos y encriptados.

Con FDNA Telehealth, se puede acercar a un diagnóstico.
¡Reserve ya su hora para la sesión de asesoramiento genético en línea, dentro de 72 horas!

EspañolDeutschPortuguêsFrançaisEnglish