4.5 Review

Mitochondrial diseases in South Asia-A systematic review

期刊

MITOCHONDRION
卷 62, 期 -, 页码 24-30

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.mito.2021.10.007

关键词

Mitochondrial diseases; South Asia; Rare diseases; Genetic diagnosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Clinical research on mitochondrial diseases in the South Asian region is primarily based on case reports, with India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka having published the most studies. Due to limited literature data on mitochondrial diseases in the South Asian region, it is challenging to accurately assess the burden of these diseases.
Background: Mitochondrial diseases are largely underdiagnosed due to their heterogeneity in clinical presentation and genotype. This is especially true for resource-constrained settings in South Asian countries such as Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Pakistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Myanmar. This study aims to evaluate the current status of clinical presentations, diagnosis and treatment of Mitochondrial diseases in the South Asian region. Methods: We undertook a systematic review of the literature on mitochondrial diseases in the South Asian region. We searched Medline, Pubmed, Cochrane library, and Google scholar using the search terms, Mitochondrial diseases AND Metabolic diseases (Mesh terms) in the title or the abstract field for each South Asian Country (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Pakistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Myanmar). Results: We found 89 citations in Pubmed, 22 citations in Cochrane library and 68 in Google scholar respectively. A total of 25 non-duplicated studies met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. After assessing the quality of the published studies 18 were included. Which comprised of 17 case reports and one case-control study. Conclusion: Studies that were published were case reports from India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. Due to the paucity of published data on mitochondrial diseases in the South Asian region, it is difficult to estimate its true burden.

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

4.5
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