T=
ITLE:
COMMON OTOLARYNGOLOGICAL CONGENITAL ABNORMALITIES:
Visual Synopsis of Cla=
ssic
Syndromes and Features
SOURCE: Grand Rounds Presentation, UTMB, Dept. of Otolaryngology
DATE: November 22, 2010
RESIDENT PHYSICIAN: Viet Pham, MD
FACULTY PHYSICIAN: Harold Pine, MD
FACULTY PHYSICIAN: Shraddha Mukerji, MD
SERIES EDITOR: Francis B. Quinn, Jr., MD
ARCHIVIST: Melinda Stoner Qui=
nn,
MSICS
=
&qu=
ot;This
material was prepared by resident physicians in partial fulfillment of
educational requirements established for the Postgraduate Training Program =
of
the UTMB Department of Otolaryngology/Head and Neck Surgery and was not
intended for clinical use in its present form. It was prepared for the purp=
ose
of stimulating group discussion in a conference setting. No warranties, eit=
her
express or implied, are made with respect to its accuracy, completeness, or
timeliness. The material does not necessarily reflect the current or past
opinions of members of the UTMB faculty and should not be used for purposes=
of
diagnosis or treatment without consulting appropriate literature sources and
informed professional opinion."
=
* Special
gratitude goes to Lewis Hutchinson, M.D. for his assistance and contributio=
n.*
INTRODUCTION
Many children will present to the otolaryngology practice with congenital abnormalities, and it is important that he or she = be familiar with characteristics affiliated with a number of these syndromes.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> There may be times when one may be= the first to encounter an affected individual and suggest the diagnosis, but aw= areness of otolaryngologically related features and subsequent treatment is vital in managing such patients. (Author’s note: This manuscript is best used = as a supplement to its accompanying PowerPoint presentation, which is designed t= o visually highlight the classic presentation of commonly encountered syndromes from an otolaryngological perspective.)
DOWN SYNDROME
Considered the most common cause of intellectual disability today, Down syndrome was first described in 1866 by John Langdon= Down but its etiology was not discovered until 1959 by Jerome Lejeune and Patric= ia Jacobs. The genetic basis for this conditi= on is the inheritance of a third chromosome 21 leading to its other eponym, Triso= my 21, which commonly occurs from a nondisjunction in gamete formation during meiosis. Down syndrome is not= able for presenting with genetic mosaicism, where there are two cell populations reside within the same person, leading to a high degree of phenotypical variability among affected individuals.&nb= sp; This syndrome can also arise from a Robertsonian translocation, typically when the long arm of chromosome 21 attaches to another chromosome (usually chromosome 14) during gamete formation. While the parent would remain phenotypically normal, there is a significantly higher chance of passing an extra chromosome 21 to the offspring. There also appears to be an increased risk of Down syndrome with advanced maternal age.
Characteristic head and neck physical exam findi= ngs include brachycephaly that typically manifests with a flat occiput and nasal bridge along with a hypoplastic maxilla resulting in a “round” appearing face. Ears are ofte= ntimes low-set and microtic with an over-folded helical fold. Affected individuals may demonstra= te macroglossia and glossoptosis, which may be more pronounced in the presence= of microgenia. Aggregations of connective tissue, known as Brushfield spots, can lead to a “speckled” appearance on irises. While some individuals in the norm= al population may have natural mild upslanting palepebral fissures, they are more pronoun= ced in those with Down syndrome. = In a similar manner, epicanthal folds may be present in unaffected people but are more noticeable in Down syndrome as to cover a significant portion of their medial canthi.
Although they involve organ systems that are not
primarily evaluated by otolaryngologists, children with Down syndrome have =
been
observed to exhibit a Simian crease within the palms of their hands and a
widened gap between their first and second toes, often referred to as a san=
dal
gap deformity. There is also =
a high
incidence of atrioventricular cardiac septal defects, gastroesophageal refl=
ux,
duodenal stenosis or atresia, and Hirschsprung disease or celiac disease.
![](3D"congen-abnom-101122_files/image002.jpg")
Figure 1. S= ome typical features of Down syndrome.
The first physical finding suggestive of Down sy= ndrome can actually be discovered by the obstetrician with the discovery of absent= or hypoplastic nasal bones on prenatal ultrasonography. The risk is greatest if no nasal b= ones are appreciated in the first trimester, while this risk decreases, but still remains elevated, with the presence of hypoplastic nasal bones or observing these anomalies in the second trimester.
From an otolaryngological perspective, affected = children are typically referred for placement of tympanostomy tubes secondary to recurrent otitis media and conductive hearing loss (CHL) stemming from persistent middle ear effusions. Otolaryngologists may also be asked to evaluate for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) secondary t= o upper airway obstruction from adenotonsillar hypertrophy and glossoptosis. In more complex cases, children may present with tracheoesophageal fistulas warranting prompt surgical repair.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Throughout their lives, individual= s with Down syndrome should be monitored for signs of hypothyroidism, often from Hashimoto’s thyroiditis, and hematopoietic malignancies including acu= te lymphoblastic leukemia and transient myeloproliferative disorder.
Sp= ecial surgical consideration comes about from a high incidence of atlantoaxial instability of the cervical spine, usually from laxity of the transverse ligament between the odontoid process of the C2 vertebra and the posterior aspect of the anterior arch of the C1 vertebra. The clinical consequence of this i= s the anterior subluxation of C1 against C2 resulting in spinal cord compression. Most studies of = this phenomenon reported greater dislocation with neck flexion, but a combinatio= n of extension and head “lifting”—a movement commonly incurred during laryngoscopy—may produce the same result especially when compounded with head rotation. This can be further exacerbated by bony cervical anomalies that may be present in Down syndrome individuals. Consequently, a thorough history and physical examination is crucial= to identifying those with suspected cervical cord compression prior to undergo= ing surgical procedures.
CROUZON SYNDROME
Crouzon syndrome is well-known for its striking craniofacial malformations. F= irst described in 1912 by the French physician, Octave Crouzon, the genetic defe= ct appears to emanate from an autosomal dominant mutation of fibroblast growth factor receptor II (FGFR2) on chromosome 10. The result is an abnormal first branchial arch during embryological development, affecting the maxilla and mandibular precursors with an early fusion of facial and skull bones during fetal development.
Craniosynostosis is commonly encountered, which = should be expected considering the premature fusion of the craniofacial skeleton.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> The maxilla is often hypoplastic a= nd results in the appearance of mandibular prognathism, although the mandible itself may also be subject to bony abnormalities. Affected individuals typically exh= ibit some degree of ocular malformations including hypertelorism, strabismus, and exophthalmos. The external appearance of the nose may demonstrate psittichorhina, a beak-like appearan= ce. Mental retardation is not a hallma= rk feature unless premature closure of the cranial suture lines impairs brain development. These findings a= re presented in Figure 2.
![](3D"congen-abnom-101122_files/image004.jpg")
Figure 2. S= ome typical features of Crouzon syndrome.
Approximately one-third of patients with Crouzon syndrome suffer from hearing loss. <= /span>While some my experience sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) or mixed hearing loss,= the majority are conductive in nature due to auricular misalignment, ossicular fixation, or persistent serous otitis media. Surgical craniofacial reconstructi= on may be undertaken for functional and cosmetic purposes.
APERT SYNDROME
Named after the French physician who first descr= ibed it in 1906, Eugene Apert, individuals with this condition share similar craniofacial features as Crouzon syndrome, which is not surprising since it also involves the same FGFR2 mutation.&nbs= p; In addition, Apert syndrome is distinguished by the presence of syndactyly secondary to a keratinocyte growth factor receptor (KGFR) mutati= on. Although regarded as an autosomal dominant condition, affected parents have been noted to pass it on to their offspring only 50% of the time whereas the majority of cases occur via spor= adic mutations.
Although similar in pathophysiology and external appearance to Crouzon, individuals with Apert syndrome exhibit a few differences aside from syndactyly. Patients do share some degree of craniofacial dysostosis and maxilla hypoplasia, but they tend to manifest a prominent frontal region. Exophthalmos and hypertelorism are= also present, and while the nose can also demonstrate some deformity, it is usua= lly more along the lines of a depressed nasal bridge. Palatal and dental anomalies are c= ommon, including cleft palate and high-arched palate, in addition to crowding of t= eeth and ectopic eruption leading to malocclusion. Some of these features are display= ed in Figure 3.
![](3D"congen-abnom-101122_files/image006.jpg")
Figure 3. S= ome typical features of Apert syndrome.
Hearing preservation is often the primary object= ive for the otolaryngologist as many individuals experience some degree of CHL = due to chronic otitis media and even stapes fixation. Despite these middle ear abnormali= ties, the cochlear aqueduct is usually patent.&n= bsp; Craniofacial reconstruction can also be performed in a similar manne= r as with Crouzon syndrome.
TREACHER COLLINS SYNDROME
Named after Edward Treacher Collins, the British
ophthalmologist who described the essential features to this disorder in 19=
00,
aspects of Treacher Collins syndrome were likely first described by Thomson=
and
Toynbee in the mid-1840’s and later by Berry in 1889. Mandibulofacial dysostosis is anot=
her
eponym while it is oftentimes referred to as Franceschetti-Zwahlen-Klein sy=
ndrome
in
The craniofacial anomalies can be best summarize= d as a result of maldevelopment of the first and second embryological pharyngeal arches, grooves, and pouches. In general, there is a characteristic facial dysmorphia that incorporates down= ward slanting palpebral fissures, hypoplastic supraorbital rims, malar and mandibular hypoplasia. The ma= ndible often demonstrates a hypoplastic condyle, short ramus and body, and an anteriorly displaced temporomandibular joint (TMJ). The nose is usually of normal size= but appears large due to the surrounding facial hypoplasia. However, affected individuals can demonstrate a flatter nasofrontal angle and underdeveloped lower nasal cartilage.
From a soft-tissue perspective, children with Tr= eacher Collins syndrome often demonstrate bilateral colobomas involving the lateral one-third of the lower eyelids. There are scant lower eyelashes, but those that are present are alwa= ys lateral to the coloboma. In conjunction with a partial or complete absence of the zygomatic arches, this results in the appearance of “tear drop”-shaped orbits. More severe cases will exhibit cle= fting of the lateral wall and floor of the orbits with extension into the inferior orbital fissures. Cleft palat= e may also occur in one-third of affected chilcren. Figure 4 presents a number of these findings.
![](3D"congen-abnom-101122_files/image008.jpg")
Figure 4. S= ome typical features of Treacher Collins syndrome.
Otolaryngologists are often asked to manage hear= ing loss, which can occur in approximately 30%. While there can be some SNHL with = or without associated vestibular dysfunction, the majority of cases are conduc= tive in nature stemming from microtia, external auditory canal atresia, or ossic= ular malformation. Despite such mi= ddle ear abnormalities, the stapes is usually normal although it may be discontinuous with the incus or exhibit an ankylosed footplate. Functional and cosmetic craniofaci= al reconstruction is another therapeutic endeavor, as is cleft palate repair if one is present. Of more immed= iate concern is placement of a tracheostomy if the degree of dysostosis results = in significant upper airway obstruction.
GOLDENHAR SYNDROME
Famous for its key feature of hemifacial hypopla= sia, Goldenhar syndrome has not been associated with a single genetic locus. There are been a variety of explanations, and two more common ones include the presence of in utero vascular disruptions with subsequent hematoma formation preventing normal embryological development a= nd a disturbance of neural crest cells at 30-45 days of gestation. An autosomal dominant familial pat= tern has been described in 1-2% of families.&nb= sp; While affecting the first and second branchial arches, Goldenhar syndrome can also engender musculoskeletal abnormalities, particularly the spine, leading to its other eponym, oculoauriculovertebral dysplasia. Cardiac, pulmonary, renal, and gastrointestinal defects may be present.&n= bsp; The term, hemifacial microsomia, is designated when the affected individual has no internal organ or vertebral disruption.
Hypoplasia of one-half of the head and face is t= he hallmark characteristic, which is probably most commonly noted with unilate= ral mandibular hypoplasia resulting in microstomia. Aside from potentially being malpo= sitioned or smaller in size, the eyes may demonstrate epibulbar lipodermoids. Eyelid colobomas may also be prese= nt, but in stark contrast with those found in Treacher Collins, they affect the upper eyelid and are usually unilateral.&n= bsp; The parotid gland on the affected side is often displaced or has even undergone some degree of aplasia. Microtia is typically present and may be associated with preauricular tags that can appear in clusters and even be located just lateral to the or= al commissure. While vertebral anomalies are common, congenital heart defects may be discovered in just ov= er half of affected children. Th= ese features are displayed in Figure 5.
![](3D"congen-abnom-101122_files/image010.jpg")
Figure 5. S= ome typical features of Goldenhar syndrome.
A classification scheme used to describe the var= ious manifestations of Goldenhar syndrome and their severity is summarized with = the OMENS acronym: Orbital distortion; Mandibular hypoplasia; = Ear anomaly; Nerve (facial nerve) involvement; and Soft-tissue deficiency. The term, “plus,” denotes the presence of anomalies of other organ systems. The orbital distorti= on is designated with an increasing number from 0 to 3, correlating to a smaller = size orbit, a displaced one inferiorly or superiorly, or one that has experienced both, respectively. The degre= e of facial nerve dysfunction essentially follows the same classification where = an increasing number describes paresis of the upper facial nerve branches, the lower ones, or all of them, respectively.&= nbsp; A similar schema is used for the ear and soft-tissue deficiency with= a progressively larger number to implicate a more severe degree of microtia a= nd tissue agenesis.
Describing the severity of mandibular hypoplasia=
also
fits within the same structure but with a few subtle alterations. A type I mandible refers to one th=
at is
of smaller size but with clearly identifiable landmarks. Type II encompasses those with an
abnormally shaped but functional TMJ alongside an abnormal glenoid fossa.
Ossicular malformations may also manifest in add= ition to microtia, and consequently, the otolaryngologist is typically asked to evaluate and rectify CHL, although SNHL may sometimes be present. Of particular note, any surgeon ope= rating in the mastoid region should be aware that the area may be poorly pneumatiz= ed and the facial nerve may demonstrate an aberrant course. Craniofacial reconstruction typica= lly involves rectifying the mandibular hypoplasia.
PIERRE ROBIN SYNDROME
The first discussion of this condition was with = the description of two patients exhibiting micrognathia, cleft palate, and retroglossoptosis by Odilon Lannelongue and Maxime Menard in 1891. However, it was Pierre Robin who published a case of an infant with the complete syndrome in 1926. The name, Pierre Robin Syndrome, c= an be considered a misnomer in that it is actually a sequence of micrognathia, glossoptosis, and cleft palate. The designation, “syndrome,” is reserved for cases when there are m= ultiple malformations attributed to a single etiology. Unfortunately, there is a substant= ial amount of confusion regarding classifying Pierre Robin as a Pubmed literatu= re review will reveal 14 different definitions with 15 different opinions regarding this particular sequence.
Virtually all theorists agree that Pierre Robin sequence is a consequence of an arrest in intrauterine development. Some have speculated on a neurolog= ical maturation theory, citing electromyography results of the tongue, pharyngea= l pillars, and palate of affected individuals. In particular, there has been a measurable delay in hypoglossal nerve conduction. This is further supported by the observation of a spontaneous correction in the majority of cases with age. The rhombence= phalic dysneurulation theory is one that suggests that a major disorder in ontogen= esis disrupts the motor and regulatory organization of the embryologic rhombencephalus.
The most accepted theory is the mechanical one, = which believes that mandibular hypoplasia occurring between 7 and 11 weeks of gestation serves as the triggering event.&= nbsp; The hypoplasia is attributed to the mandible getting temporarily cau= ght between the clavicle and sternum during development. This causes the tongue to remain h= igh in the oral cavity, preventing closure of the palatal shelves and resulting in= a cleft palate. Oligohydramnios= may also contribute to this picture by further deforming the mandible and impac= ting the tongue between the palatal shelves.
Children with Pierre Robin sequence exhibit the = triad of cleft palate, glossoptosis, and micrognathia. The cleft palate is U-shaped in 80= % of cases and V-shaped for the rest. Despite palatal involvement, it should be noted that cleft lip usual= ly does not occur. While it is important for the clinician to clearly define between micrognathia (a small mandible) and retrognathia (posterior displacement of the mandible), both findings may be simultaneously present.&nb= sp; Macroglossia and ankyloglossia occur in a minority of affected child= ren. Figure 6 summarizes the findings associated with this condition.
![](3D"congen-abnom-101122_files/image012.jpg")
Figure 6. S= ome typical features of Pierre Robin syndrome.
=
The hallmark features of Pierre Robin may be sev=
ere
enough to preclude a stable airway.
Significant obstruction may lead to OSA or even necessitate tracheos=
tomy
placement in more acute settings, and subglottic stenosis has been reported=
in
some children. Feeding is oft=
en
hampered, usually by the presence of cleft palate, and the distorted anatomy
may even contribute to aspiration.
Otolaryngologists may also be requested to manage hearing loss, whic=
h is
often conductive in nature secondary to chronic otitis media and likely
exacerbated by cleft palate.
Auricular malformation and mixed hearing loss may also be present.
Physicians need to be aware that mandibular “catch up” is possible only if micrognathia is a component of Pierre Robin sequence. Parent= s of affected children must not be mistakenly reassured that the hypoplastic mandible will eventually grow to an age-appropriate size if the classic tri= ad is in conjunction with associated syndromes. Different studies have reported Pi= erre Robin occurs as an isolated sequence at an average between 20-40% although = one report has published a rate as high as 74%. The most common syndrome associate= d with Pierre Robin sequence is Stickler syndrome, followed by velocardiofacial syndrome and Treacher Collins syndrome.
STICKLER SYNDROME
Gunnar Stickler described in 1965 a family that demonstrated a set of syndromic features including myopia, clefting, and hearing loss among five generations. Further investigation would lead to the discovery of the congenital syndrome named after him, which is essentially a disorder affecting connect= ive tissue leading to craniofacial, ocular, and arthopathic features. In particular, type II and XI coll= agen appear to be involved with autosomal dominant mutations of the COL2A1 gene = on chromosome 12, and COL11A1 and COL11A2 genes on chromosome 6. Chromosome 6 has also been reporte= d to house the COL9A1 gene that is thought to lead to a rare autosomal recessive variant.
The orofacial presentation of Stickler syndrome = is generally subtle where affected individuals tend to demonstrate a “fl= attened” face. This may manifest with midfacial hypoplasia, micrognathia, a short upturned nose, and a long philtrum. Cleft palate is oft= en present. Some of the orofacial features of this condition are presented in Figure 7. There are various ocular findings = such as myopia, glaucoma, retinal detachment, and cataracts. Similarly, children with Stickler syndrome may exhibit a range of musculoskeletal features including osteoarthritis, joint hypermobility, abnormal epiphyseal development, and vertebral abnormalities, usually scoliosis. A classic clinical history incorpo= rates the combination of a cleft palate with a family history of osteoarthritis.<= /p>
![](3D"congen-abnom-101122_files/image014.jpg")
Figure 7. S= ome typical features of Stickler syndrome.
Martin Snead and John Yates proposed criteria to= make the diagnosis of Stickler syndrome that encompasses the myriad of physical findings. Children were felt = to be affected if they demonstrated a congenital vitreous anomaly in conjunction = with three of the following: myopia before six years of age; rhegmatogenous reti= nal detachment; paravascular pigmented lattice degeneration; joint hypermobilit= y; SNHL; or midline clefting.
The otolaryngologist’s role usually involv= es hearing preservation as mild to moderate SNHL will be present in 80%, while= 15% may experience significant SNHL or even a mixed hearing loss. Most components of CHL are seconda= ry to eustachian tube dysfunction as a consequence of cleft palate, although ossicular abnormalities may be present.&nb= sp; In light that it is the most common syndrome associated with Pierre Robin sequence, attention may also be drawn to manage upper airway obstruct= ion.
WAARDENBURG SYNDROME
The Dutch ophthalmologist, Petrus Johannes Waard= enburg, first described a patient who presented with hearing loss, dystopia canthor= um, and retinal pigmentary differences in 1947. Upon identifying additional people= with similar symptoms, he defined the syndrome associated with these characteris= tic features in 1951.
Hypopigmentation is one of the hallmark findings= of this condition, most commonly manifesting in the hair and eyes. Patients will often exhibit a white forelock and either heterochromia irides or isohypochromia irides. Heterochromia irides describes the presence of two different colored irises on the same person while isohypoch= romia irides will often result in the appearance of striking sapphire-colored irises. Some individuals will= also present with vitiligo and premature graying. Another characteristic finding is = the lateral displacement of the medial canthi, referred to as dystopia canthorum. This phenomenon can produce the appearance of telecanthus and also be associated with dystopia = of the lacrimal puncta and blepharophimosis.&= nbsp; From a craniofacial perspective, affected children may demonstrate a flat nasal root with hypoplastic nasal alae and confluence of the medial eyebrows, often referred to as synophyrs, while approximately 10% may prese= nt with cleft lip and palate. Fi= gure 8 displays many of these findings.
![](3D"congen-abnom-101122_files/image016.jpg")
Figure 8. S= ome typical features of Waardenburg syndrome.
The classic findings of Waardenburg syndrome can= be divided into major and minor diagnostic criteria. Hallmark pigmentation anomalies su= ch as heterochromia irides and a white forelock, dystopia canthorum, congenital S= NHL, and a positive family history comprise major features. Those involving the nasal structur= e, synophyrs, and congenital leucoderma are considered minor ones. The diagnosis of Waardenburg syndr= ome can be made if two major criteria or one major with two minor ones are pres= ent.
Since its initial discovery, many genes leading = to four distinct subtypes of Waardenburg syndrome have been identified. These genes are regarded to be rel= ated to melanocyte differentiation, which has been attributed to the various pigmentary abnormalities. Thi= s has also been hypothesized to be the basis for the high prevalence of SNHL as melanocytes are thought to be required in the stria vascularis for normal cochlear function.
Autosomal dominant mutations in the PAX3 gene on chromosome 2 have led to types 1 and 3. Type 1 Waardenburg syndrome is the hallmark presentation of this disorder, presenting with the full symptomato= logy in addition to the presence of facial asymmetry and dysmorphic facies in so= me children. These same features= are also found in type 3 with the addition of mental retardation and musculoskeletal abnormalities including rib aplasia, amyoplasia, cystic cha= nges of the sacrum, and cutaneous syndactyly.&n= bsp; Dystopia canthorum is not present and the white forelock rarely so in type 2, which is caused by mutations of the MITF and SNAI2 genes on chromos= omes 3 and 8, respectively. Affect= ed individuals will usually demonstrate heterochromia irides and SNHL. Type 4 is a notable variant in tha= t it is engendered by autosomal recessive mutations of EDN3 (chromosome 20), EDN= RB (chromosome 13), and SOX10 (chromosome 22) genes resulting in an association with Hirschsprung’s disease.
The primary role of otolaryngologists is hearing preservation as many children will experience congenital SNHL. This is usually not progressive an= d can usually be satisfactorily managed with hearing amplification or cochlear implantation. In addition to diminished hearing, up to 75% may suffer from some degree of vestibular dysfunction. Cleft lip and pa= late may also be repaired if present, and it is possible for some individuals to request cosmetic surgical intervention usually related to their hypopigmentation or nasal features.
BECKWITH-WIEDEMANN SYNDROME
Hans-Rudolf Wiedemann first reported a familial =
form
of omphalocele and macroglossia in
The five most common features of Beckwith-Wiedem= ann syndrome are macroglossia, macrosomia, ear pits or creases, a midline abdom= inal wall defect, and neonatal hypoglycemia.&nb= sp; The severity of the abdominal defect can vary, ranging from an umbil= ical hernia to an omphalocele. Mos= t ear pits will occur along the helical rim while ear creases are located near the anti-tragus or lobule regions. These features are shown in Figure 9. In concordance with the pathophysiology of overgrowth, affected individuals may also present with an enlargement or abnormalities of visceral organs, espec= ially the renal and adrenal systems. Of particular note, the diagnosis may be delayed in some children whose manifestations may present with hemihyperplasia.
![](3D"congen-abnom-101122_files/image018.jpg")
Figure 9. S= ome typical features of Beckwith Wiedemann syndrome.
There are a few minor findings associated with Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome including neonatal hypoglycemia, polyhydramnios, prematurity, facial nevus flammeus, hemangiomas, dysmorphic facies such as midfacial hypoplasia, cardiac abnormalities, diastasis recti, and an advanc= ed bone age. Together with the t= ypical major findings, the diagnosis can be made with either the presence of three major features or two major features and three minor ones.
The macroglossia associated with Beckwith-Wiedem= ann syndrome is typically less noticeable with age, but otolaryngologists may encounter such children in more emergent situations if the degree of tongue enlargement precludes a patent upper airway. Some have even advocated surgical = tongue volume reduction, although this is highly controversial with disagreement regarding the timing and amount to be removed. While often managed by other physi= cians, the otolaryngologist should be conscious of the increased risk of WilmsR= 17; tumor and hepatoblastoma in affected individuals. This risk is usually at its peak b= y four years of age and tends to decrease as children get older, but routine surveillance is necessitated with obtaining an alpha-fetoprotein level every six weeks until four years of age and an abdominal ultrasound every three months until eight years of age.
NEUROFIBROMATOSIS
First written about in 1882 by Friedrich Daniel = von Recklinghausen, the underlying process of neurofibromatosis involves the growth of nerve ti= ssue that can cause compressive damage if it continues to grow unimpeded. Divided into two major variants, t= ype 1 is sometimes referred to as peripheral neurofibromatosis to describe the ty= pe of neoplasms that result. An autosomal dominant condition with variable expression, the genetic insult attributed to type 1 neurofibromatosis is a mutation of the neurofibromin g= ene (NF1) on chromosome 17 although up to half may arise from a de novo mutation.
There are a myriad of hallmark features associat= ed with type 1 neurofibromatosis. Cutaneous neurofibromas are soft and can be pushed deeper into the dermis with palpation, known as the “button hole sign,” and they typically enlarge and increase in number with time. Multiple neurofibromas may cluster together to form a plexiform neuroma. Affected individuals may demonstrate some cutaneous pigmentary findi= ngs such as café au lait spots and freckling of the axillary or inguinal regions, sometimes referred to as a “Crowe sign.” Skeletal anomalies may be present = such as tibial pseudoarthrosis and long bone bowing. Pulsatile exophthalmos may be encountered if there is sphenoid wing dysplasia. An ophthalmological examination may reveal Lisch nodules, which are hamartomas of the iris that are often asymptomatic and usually only seen with slit-lamp testing, and a higher incidence of optic gliomas. F= igure 10 presents these findings.
![](3D"congen-abnom-101122_files/image020.jpg")
Figure 10. = Some typical features of Type 1 Neurofibromatosis.
Using these characteristic findings, the diagnos= is of type 1 neurofibromatosis can be made if a person fulfills at least two of t= he following criteria: two or more neurofibromas or a single plexiform neuroma; axillary or inguinal freckling; an optic glioma; two or more Lisch nodules;= a distinctive osseous lesion; café au lait macules; or a first-degree relative with the same condition. In regards to the café au lait lesions, they must have a diam= eter larger than 5mm in prepubescents or larger than 15mm in adults.
Also an autosomal dominant, type 2 neurofibromat= osis affects the Merlin gene (NF2) on chromosome 22 and is sometimes regarded as central neurofibromatosis in light of the high incidence of neoplasms involving the central nervous system (CNS). There is a paucity of café au lait spots and axillary or inguinal frecklin= g, and CNS involvement does not ncecessarily occur at an early age. This can make the diagnosis a diff= icult one, especially since type 2 neurofibromatosis only comprises approximately= 10% of all individuals affected with neurofibromatosis.
The pathognomonic finding of type 2 neurofibroma= tosis is bilateral acoustic neuromas. Patients may also present with schwannomas affecting the spinal cord, which are often dumbbell-shaped, or other nonvestibular cranial nerves such= as III, V, IX, X, and XI. Mening= iomas are the most common central nervous tumor.= While less in quantity compared to type 1, café au lait spots= may still be present. Similarly, subcapsular cataracts are more prevelant with type 2 as opposed to the Lisch nodules and optic gliomas associated with type 1. These features are displayed in Fi= gure 11.
![](3D"congen-abnom-101122_files/image022.jpg")
Figure 11. = Some typical features of Type 2 Neurofibromatosis.
The diagnosis can be presumptive if a person pre= sents with a unilateral vestibular schwannoma and an affected first-degree relati= ve in addition to two of the following: meningioma, glioma, schwannoma, or a juvenile posterior subcapsular or cortical cataract. When there is no positive family h= istory, the diagnosis can be suggestive in the presence of multiple meningiomas.
The otolaryngologist is often called upon to hel= p in the management of the various schwannomas that may develop, but children may also present with striking facial deformities with involvement of structure= s in the head and neck region. Whi= le type 1 neurofibromatosis is regarded to carry a more favorable prognosis th= an type 2 due to its lack of CNS neoplasms, there is a higher incidence of malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors, neurosarcomas, and gastrointestin= al stromal tumors.
ADDITIONAL SYNDROMES
Not all congenital syndromes will present with o= bvious craniofacial findings. First described in 1912 by Maurice Klippel and André Feil, the syndrome th= at carries their namesake encompasses the congenital fusion of cervical vertebrae. No clear etiology = has been elucidated to Klippel-Feil syndrome, but there have been some reports suggestive of a familial inheritance suggestive of an autosomal dominant pattern with fusion at the C2-3 level and more of an autosomal recessive on= e at the C5-6 one. This condition = can be categorized into three classifications.&nb= sp; Cervical fusion occurs at a single level in type I and along multiple noncontiguous ones in type II, while type III demonstrates multiple contigu= ous fusion segments. Children may exhibit a short webbed neck and a low hairline. Other associated anomalies include= a malformed and displaced scapula, known as a Sprengel deformity, scoliosis, renal abnormalities, and even facial asymmetry.
The hallmark feature of feature of Usher syndrom= e is the combination of both hearing and vision loss. A defective inner ear is the under= lying process to this condition and can be divided into three main variants. Type I refers to when deafness and= vestibular dysfunction are both present, which contrasts with type II where the hearing loss is nonprogressive and the vestibular system is normal. Hearing loss is progressive in typ= e III, and the vestibular function is estimated at half of normal. Vision loss results from retinitis pigmentosa and is typically progressive.&n= bsp; Initially affecting the rod cells of the retina, patients will often first complain of diminished night vision before eventually proceeding towa= rd a loss of peripheral vision.
Pendred syndrome pairs the presence of SNHL and a thyroid goiter. Some affected individuals will also experience hypothyroidism. In Jervell and Lange-Neilsen syndr= ome, KCNQ1 and KCNE1 mutations result in defective potassium channels in the inn= er ear and cardiac muscle. Consequently, patients present with SNHL and potentially fatal palpitations stemming from long QT syndrome.
CONCLUSION
Many congenital syndromes will warrant otolaryngological intervention. While the degree of this endeavor may range from mild to more dire in nature, a otolaryngologist can manage the syndromic child best with a keen awareness of coexisting morbidities. On a final note, it should be noted that mental retardation is not a hallmark feature of many of these conditions. Consequently, a substantial number= of these children are fully aware of the ridicule from their peers their syndr= ome can create. Regardless of his= or her specialty, a good physician can help the affected child cope with both = the medical and social implications of their disorder.
REFERENCES
Admiraal RJ, et al<=
/i>.
Hearing impairment in Stickler syndrome. Adv Otorhinolaryngol 2002;
61:216-23.
Bailey BJ, Johnson JT,
Newlands SD, eds. Head and Neck Surgery – Otolaryngology, 4th Ed.
Philadelphia: Lippincott, 2006. pp 1311-2,1380-6,2794.
Breugem CC, Courtemanc=
he DJ.
Robin sequence: clearing nosologic confusion. Cleft Palate Craniofac J
2010; 47:197-200.
Chen H. Apert syndrome=
. eMedicine
2 Sep 2009. Accessed 12 Oct 2010 <http://emedi=
cine.medscape.com/article/941723-overview>.
Chen H. Crouzon syndro=
me. eMedicine
10 Sep 2009. Accessed 12 Oct 2010 <http://emedi=
cine.medscape.com/article/942989-overview>.
Chen H. Down syndrome.=
eMedicine
22 Mar 2010. Accessed 31 Oct 2010 <http://emedi=
cine.medscape.com/article/943216-overview>.
Crawford AH, Schorry E=
K.
Neurofibromatosis update. J Pediatr Orthop 2006; 26:413-23.
Dahl AA, Grostern RJ.
Neurofibromatosis-1. eMedicine 21 May 2010. Accessed 5 Nov 2010 <=
http://emed=
icine.medscape.com/article/1219222-overview>.
DeBaun MR, et al.
Epigenetic alterations of H19 and LIT1 distinguish patients with
Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome with cancer and birth defects. Am J Hum Gene=
t
2002; 70:604-11.
DeBaun MR, Tucker MA. =
Risk
of cancer during the first four years of life in children from The Beckwith
Wiedemann Syndrome Registry. J Pediatr 1998; 132:398-400.
DeBella K, Szudek J,
Friedman JM. Use of the national institutes of health criteria for diagnosi=
s of
neurofibromatosis 1 in children. Pediatrics 2000; 105(3 Pt 1):608-14=
.
Dourmishev AL, Jannige=
r CK.
Down syndrome. eMedicine 1 Jul 2009. Accessed 4 Nov 2010 <http://emed=
icine.medscape.com/article/1113071-overview>.
Dourmishev LA, Jannige=
r CK.
Waardenburg syndrome. eMedicine 2 Jun 2009. Accessed 30 Oct 2010 <=
;http://emed=
icine.medscape.com/article/1113314-overview>.
Elliott M, et al.
Clinical features and natural history of Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome: prese=
ntation
of 74 new cases. Clinical Genetics 1994; 46:168-74.
Farrer LA, et al.
Waardenburg syndrome (WS) type I is caused by defects at multiple loci, one=
of
which is near ALPP on chromosome 2: first report of the WS consortium. A=
m J
Hum Genet 1992; 50:902-13.
Ferry RJ. Beckwith-Wie=
demann
syndrome. eMedicine 15 Apr 2010. Accessed 23 Oct 2010 <http://emedi=
cine.medscape.com/article/919477-overview>.
Flint PW, et al=
, eds.
Cummings Otolaryngology: Head and Neck Surgery, 5th Ed. Philadelphia:
Mosby Elsevier, 2010. ch 147, 184.
Gould HJ, Caldarelli D=
D.
Hearing and otopathology in Apert syndrome. Archives of Otolaryngology
1982; 108:347-9.
Gonçalves LF,
Espinoza J, Lee W, et al. Phenotypic characteristics of absent and
hypoplastic nasal bones in fetuses with Down syndrome: description by
3-dimensional ultrasonography and clinical significance. J Ultrasound Me=
d
2004; 23:1619-27.
Handzic J, et al.
Hearing levels in Pierre Robin syndrome. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 19=
95;
32:30-6.
Hata T, Todd MM. Cervi=
cal
spine considerationswhen anesthesizing patients with Down syndrome. Anes=
thesiology
2005; 102:680-5.
Heike CL, Hing AV.
Craniofacial microsomia review. Gene Review. Eds. Pagon RA, et al=
.
19 Mar 2009. Accessed 23 Oct 2010 <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/bookshelf/br.fcgi?book=3Dgene&=
part=3Dm-hfm-ov>.
Horgan JE, et al.
OMENS-plus: analysis of craniofacial and extracraniofacial anomalies in
hemifacial microsomia. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 1995; 32:405-12.
Jackson IT, Malhotra G.
Congenital syndromes. eMedicine 2 Jul 2009. Accessed 12 Oct 2010 <=
;http://emed=
icine.medscape.com/article/1280034-overview>.
Jakobsen LP, et al<=
/i>.
The genetic basis of the Pierre Robin Sequence. Cleft Palate Craniofac J=
2006; 43:155-9.
Lee KJ, ed. Essenti=
al
Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, 9th Ed.
Liu XZ, Newton VE, Rea=
d AP.
Waardenburg syndrome type II: phenotypic findings and diagnostic criteria. =
Am
J Med Genet 1995; 55:95-100.
Nazareth MR, Helm TN.
Neurofibromatosis. eMedicine 16 Jun 2010. Accessed 5 Nov 2010 <http://emed=
icine.medscape.com/article/1112001-overview>.
Nowak CB. Genetics and
hearing loss: a review of Stickler syndrome. J Commun Disord 1998;
31:437-54.
Orvidas LJ, et al.
Hearing and otopathology in Crouzon syndrome. Layrngoscope 1999;
109:1372-5.
Peterson-Falzone SJ,
Hardin-Jones MA, Karnell MP. Cleft Palate Speech, 4th Ed. St. Louis:
Mosby, 2010.
Pletcher BA.
Neurofibromatosis, type 2. eMedicine 3 Mar 2010. Accessed 5 Nov 2010
<http=
://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1178283-overview>.
Poulson AV, et al. Cli=
nical
features of type 2 Stickler syndrome. J Med Genet 2004; 41:e107.
Pron G, et al. =
Ear
malformation and hearing loss in patients with Treacher Collins syndrome. <=
i>Cleft
Palate Craniofac J 1993; 30:97-103.
Robin NH, Falk MJ,
Haldeman-Englert CR. FGFR-related craniosynostosis syndromes. Gene Revie=
w.
Eds. Pagon RA, et al. 27 Sept 2007. Accessed 19 Oct 2010 <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/bookshelf/br.fcgi?book=3Dg=
ene&part=3Dcraniosynostosis>.
Saenz RB. Primary care=
of
infants and young children with Down syndrome. Am Fam Physician 1999;
59:381-90,392,395-6.
Samartzis DD, Herman J,
Lubicky JP. Classification of congenitally fused cervical patterns in
Klippel-Feil patients: epidemiology and role in the development of cervical
spine-related symptoms. Spine 2006; 31:F798-804.
Samartzis D, Lubicky J=
P,
Herman J. Symptomatic cervical disc herniation in a pediatric Klippel-Feil
patient: the risk of neural injury associated with extensive congenitally f=
used
vertebrae and a hypermobile segment. Spine 2006; 31:F335-8.
Sangkhathat S, et a=
l.
Novel mutation of Endothelin-B receptor gene in Waardenburg-Hirschsprung
disease. Pediatr Surg Int 2005; 21:960-3.
Schwartz RA, Jozwiak S,
Krantz I. Waardenburg syndrome. eMedicine 4 Jun 2010. Accessed 24 Oct
2010 <=
http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/950277-overview>.
Spivey PS, Bradshaw WT.
Recognition and management of the infant with Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome. =
Adv
Neonatal Care 2009; 9:279-84.
Sullivan AJ. Klippel-F=
eil
syndrome. eMedicine 23 Jun 2009. Accessed 5 Nov 2010 <http://eme=
dicine.medscape.net/article/1264848-diagnosis>.
Tewfik TL, Trinh N,
Tolarova MM. Pierre Ro=
bin
Malformation. eMedicine 25 Mar 2009. Accessed 21 Oct 2010 <http://emedi=
cine.medscape.com/article/995706-overview>.
Tolarova MM, Wong GB, =
Varma
S. Mandibulofacial dysostosis. eMedicine 24 Nov 2009. Accessed 17 Oct
2010 <=
http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/946143-overview>.
Verheij JB, et al.
Shah-Waardenburg syndrome and PCWH associated with SOX10 mutations: a case
report and review of the literature. Eur J Paediatr Neurol 2006;
10:11-7.
Watanabe A, et al.
Epistatic relationship between Waardenburg syndrome genes MITF and PAX3.