4.0 Article

New Alstrom syndrome phenotypes based on the evaluation of 182 cases

期刊

ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
卷 165, 期 6, 页码 675-683

出版社

AMER MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1001/archinte.165.6.675

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Alstrom syndrome is a recessively inherited genetic disorder characterized by congenital retinal dystrophy that leads to blindness, hearing impairment, childhood obesity, insulin resistance, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. We provide new details on cardiologic, hepatic, gastrointestinal, urologic, pulmonary, and neurobehavioral phenotypes in Alstrom syndrome and describe the histopathologic findings in 5 individuals. Methods: We obtained data on 182 patients from clinical examinations, medical record reviews, standardized questionnaires, and personal interviews with physicians and parents. Results: Dilated cardiomyopathy occurred in 60% of patients. Age at onset was either during infancy, often before vision disturbances were noted, or in adolescence or adulthood. There is a risk of recurrence of infantile cardiomyopathy. Hyperinsulinemia (92%) developed in early childhood and progressed to type 2 diabetes rnellitus in 82% of those older than 16 years. Hypertriglyceridemia (54%) precipitated pancreatitis in 8 patients. Urologic dysfunction and gastrointestinal disturbances occurred in 48% and 35% of patients, respectively. Fifty-three percent of patients had persistent pulmonary symptoms. Neurologic symptoms in 20% of patients included clonic tic and absence seizures. Developmental motor or language delays were observed in 46% of patients. Fibrotic infiltrations of multiple organs, that is, kidney, heart, liver, lung, urinary bladder, gonads, and pancreas, were observed. Conclusions: The wide-ranging and complex spectrum of phenotypes reported herein broadens those previously described for Alstrom syndrome. These findings will aid physicians in making an early and accurate diagnosis and will help effect appropriate monitoring and treatment.

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

4.0
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