Perspectives on the revised Ghent criteria for the diagnosis of Marfan syndrome

Standard

Perspectives on the revised Ghent criteria for the diagnosis of Marfan syndrome. / von Kodolitsch, Yskert; De Backer, Julie; Schüler, Helke; Bannas, Peter; Behzadi, Cyrus; Bernhardt, Alexander M; Hillebrand, Mathias; Fuisting, Bettina; Sheikhzadeh, Sara; Rybczynski, Meike; Kölbel, Tilo; Püschel, Klaus; Blankenberg, Stefan; Robinson, Peter N.

In: Appl Clin Genet, Vol. 8, 2015, p. 137-155.

Research output: SCORING: Contribution to journalSCORING: Journal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Bibtex

@article{1a1ae717f8e44d79ae54b7d60430c134,
title = "Perspectives on the revised Ghent criteria for the diagnosis of Marfan syndrome",
abstract = "Three international nosologies have been proposed for the diagnosis of Marfan syndrome (MFS): the Berlin nosology in 1988; the Ghent nosology in 1996 (Ghent-1); and the revised Ghent nosology in 2010 (Ghent-2). We reviewed the literature and discussed the challenges and concepts of diagnosing MFS in adults. Ghent-1 proposed more stringent clinical criteria, which led to the confirmation of MFS in only 32%-53% of patients formerly diagnosed with MFS according to the Berlin nosology. Conversely, both the Ghent-1 and Ghent-2 nosologies diagnosed MFS, and both yielded similar frequencies of MFS in persons with a causative FBN1 mutation (90% for Ghent-1 versus 92% for Ghent-2) and in persons not having a causative FBN1 mutation (15% versus 13%). Quality criteria for diagnostic methods include objectivity, reliability, and validity. However, the nosology-based diagnosis of MFS lacks a diagnostic reference standard and, hence, quality criteria such as sensitivity, specificity, or accuracy cannot be assessed. Medical utility of diagnosis implies congruency with the historical criteria of MFS, as well as with information about the etiology, pathogenesis, diagnostic triggers, prognostic triggers, and potential complications of MFS. In addition, social and psychological utilities of diagnostic criteria include acceptance by patients, patient organizations, clinicians and scientists, practicability, costs, and the reduction of anxiety. Since the utility of a diagnosis or exclusion of MFS is context-dependent, prioritization of utilities is a strategic decision in the process of nosology development. Screening tests for MFS should be used to identify persons with MFS. To confirm the diagnosis of MFS, Ghent-1 and Ghent-2 perform similarly, but Ghent-2 is easier to use. To maximize the utility of the diagnostic criteria of MFS, a fair and transparent process of nosology development is essential.",
author = "{von Kodolitsch}, Yskert and {De Backer}, Julie and Helke Sch{\"u}ler and Peter Bannas and Cyrus Behzadi and Bernhardt, {Alexander M} and Mathias Hillebrand and Bettina Fuisting and Sara Sheikhzadeh and Meike Rybczynski and Tilo K{\"o}lbel and Klaus P{\"u}schel and Stefan Blankenberg and Robinson, {Peter N}",
year = "2015",
doi = "10.2147/TACG.S60472",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
pages = "137--155",
journal = "Appl Clin Genet",
issn = "1178-704X",
publisher = "DOVE MEDICAL PRESS LTD",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Perspectives on the revised Ghent criteria for the diagnosis of Marfan syndrome

AU - von Kodolitsch, Yskert

AU - De Backer, Julie

AU - Schüler, Helke

AU - Bannas, Peter

AU - Behzadi, Cyrus

AU - Bernhardt, Alexander M

AU - Hillebrand, Mathias

AU - Fuisting, Bettina

AU - Sheikhzadeh, Sara

AU - Rybczynski, Meike

AU - Kölbel, Tilo

AU - Püschel, Klaus

AU - Blankenberg, Stefan

AU - Robinson, Peter N

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - Three international nosologies have been proposed for the diagnosis of Marfan syndrome (MFS): the Berlin nosology in 1988; the Ghent nosology in 1996 (Ghent-1); and the revised Ghent nosology in 2010 (Ghent-2). We reviewed the literature and discussed the challenges and concepts of diagnosing MFS in adults. Ghent-1 proposed more stringent clinical criteria, which led to the confirmation of MFS in only 32%-53% of patients formerly diagnosed with MFS according to the Berlin nosology. Conversely, both the Ghent-1 and Ghent-2 nosologies diagnosed MFS, and both yielded similar frequencies of MFS in persons with a causative FBN1 mutation (90% for Ghent-1 versus 92% for Ghent-2) and in persons not having a causative FBN1 mutation (15% versus 13%). Quality criteria for diagnostic methods include objectivity, reliability, and validity. However, the nosology-based diagnosis of MFS lacks a diagnostic reference standard and, hence, quality criteria such as sensitivity, specificity, or accuracy cannot be assessed. Medical utility of diagnosis implies congruency with the historical criteria of MFS, as well as with information about the etiology, pathogenesis, diagnostic triggers, prognostic triggers, and potential complications of MFS. In addition, social and psychological utilities of diagnostic criteria include acceptance by patients, patient organizations, clinicians and scientists, practicability, costs, and the reduction of anxiety. Since the utility of a diagnosis or exclusion of MFS is context-dependent, prioritization of utilities is a strategic decision in the process of nosology development. Screening tests for MFS should be used to identify persons with MFS. To confirm the diagnosis of MFS, Ghent-1 and Ghent-2 perform similarly, but Ghent-2 is easier to use. To maximize the utility of the diagnostic criteria of MFS, a fair and transparent process of nosology development is essential.

AB - Three international nosologies have been proposed for the diagnosis of Marfan syndrome (MFS): the Berlin nosology in 1988; the Ghent nosology in 1996 (Ghent-1); and the revised Ghent nosology in 2010 (Ghent-2). We reviewed the literature and discussed the challenges and concepts of diagnosing MFS in adults. Ghent-1 proposed more stringent clinical criteria, which led to the confirmation of MFS in only 32%-53% of patients formerly diagnosed with MFS according to the Berlin nosology. Conversely, both the Ghent-1 and Ghent-2 nosologies diagnosed MFS, and both yielded similar frequencies of MFS in persons with a causative FBN1 mutation (90% for Ghent-1 versus 92% for Ghent-2) and in persons not having a causative FBN1 mutation (15% versus 13%). Quality criteria for diagnostic methods include objectivity, reliability, and validity. However, the nosology-based diagnosis of MFS lacks a diagnostic reference standard and, hence, quality criteria such as sensitivity, specificity, or accuracy cannot be assessed. Medical utility of diagnosis implies congruency with the historical criteria of MFS, as well as with information about the etiology, pathogenesis, diagnostic triggers, prognostic triggers, and potential complications of MFS. In addition, social and psychological utilities of diagnostic criteria include acceptance by patients, patient organizations, clinicians and scientists, practicability, costs, and the reduction of anxiety. Since the utility of a diagnosis or exclusion of MFS is context-dependent, prioritization of utilities is a strategic decision in the process of nosology development. Screening tests for MFS should be used to identify persons with MFS. To confirm the diagnosis of MFS, Ghent-1 and Ghent-2 perform similarly, but Ghent-2 is easier to use. To maximize the utility of the diagnostic criteria of MFS, a fair and transparent process of nosology development is essential.

U2 - 10.2147/TACG.S60472

DO - 10.2147/TACG.S60472

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 26124674

VL - 8

SP - 137

EP - 155

JO - Appl Clin Genet

JF - Appl Clin Genet

SN - 1178-704X

ER -