4.6 Article

The FEEDS (FEeding Eating Deglutition Skills) over Time Study in Cardiofaciocutaneous Syndrome

Journal

GENES
Volume 14, Issue 7, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/genes14071338

Keywords

cardiofaciocutaneous syndrome; dysphagia; genotype-phenotype correlation; personalised medicine; transition; RASopathies

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aims to quantify the development of feeding skills in CFCS patients from birth to adulthood. The findings show that feeding difficulties in CFCS patients persist beyond childhood and supportive care is needed until adulthood.
Feeding, eating and deglutition difficulties are key concerns in patients with cardiofaciocutaneous syndrome (CFCS). This study intends to quantify the development of feeding skills from birth to adulthood in patients with CFCS. Twenty-seven patients (eight males; mean age: 16.7 & PLUSMN; 8.3 years; median age: 15 years, age range: 1.5-38 years) with molecularly confirmed clinical diagnosis of CFCS were prospectively recruited from the Rare Disease Unit, Paediatrics Department, Fondazione Policlinico Agostino Gemelli-IRCCS, Rome, Italy, over a one-year period. Pathogenic variants along with key information regarding oro-motor features were collected. Sialorrhea was quantified using the Drooling Quotient 5. Feeding abilities were screened using the Italian version of the Montreal Children's Hospital Feeding Scale (I-MCH-FS). The oral sensory processing section of the Sensory Profile completed the assessment. Mild-to-profuse drooling was experienced by 25% of patients, and food taste selectivity was a constant during infancy (65%), with persistence even beyond adolescence. Nineteen percent of participants with long-term enteral feeding dependency had BRAF, KRAS and MAP2K1 mutations. These findings document that mealtime challenges in CFCS do not remain restricted only to the paediatric age, and that supportive care until adulthood plays a key role.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available