4.4 Article

Evaluation and long-term follow-up of infants with inborn errors of metabolism identified in an expanded screening programme

期刊

MOLECULAR GENETICS AND METABOLISM
卷 104, 期 4, 页码 470-475

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ymgme.2011.09.021

关键词

Expanded newborn screening; Inborn errors of metabolism; Tandem mass spectrometry; Dried urine samples; Psychomotor Development Index

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Newborn screening (NBS) by tandem mass spectrometry started in Galicia (Spain) in 2000. We analyse the results of screening and clinical follow-up of inborn errors of metabolism (IEM) detected during 10 years. Our programme basically includes the disorders recommended by the American College of Medical Genetics. Since 2002, blood and urine samples have been collected from every newborn on the 3rd day of life; before then, samples were collected between the 5th and 8th days. Newborns who show abnormal results are referred to the clinical unit for diagnosis and treatment. In these 10 years, NBS has led directly to the identification of 137 IEM cases (one per 2060 newborns, if 35 cases of benign hyperphenylalaninemia are excluded). In addition, 33 false positive results and 10 cases of transitory elevation of biomarkers were identified (making the positive predictive rate 76.11%), and 4 false negative results. The use of urine samples contributed significantly to IEM detection in 44% of cases. Clinical symptoms appeared before positive screening results in nine patients (6.6%), four of them screened between days 5 and 8. The death rate was 2.92%; of the survivors, 95.5% were asymptomatic after a mean observation period of 54 months, and only two had an intellectual/psychomotor development score less than 85. Compared to other studies, a high incidence of type I glutaric aciduria was detected, one in 35,027 newborns. This report highlights the benefits of urine sample collection during screening, and it is the first study on expanded newborn screening results in Spain. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据