Marfan Syndrome (MFS)

Back

Practice Essentials

Marfan syndrome (MFS) is a spectrum of disorders caused by a heritable genetic defect of connective tissue that has an autosomal dominant mode of transmission.[1, 2, 3, 4]  The defect itself has been isolated to the FBN1 gene on chromosome 15, which codes for the connective tissue protein fibrillin.[1, 5, 6]  Abnormalities in this protein cause a myriad of distinct clinical problems, of which the musculoskeletal, cardiac, and ocular system problems predominate.[2, 7, 8]

The most severe of these clinical problems include aortic root dilatation and dissection, which have historically been the causative factors in early patient demise.[9]  Skeletal deformities such as thoracolumbar scoliosis, thoracic lordosis, and pectus excavatum, may lead to pulmonary difficulties that include restrictive airway disease and cor pulmonale if the deformities are progressive and untreated. Finally, blindness may result from unrecognized and untreated glaucoma, retinal detachment, and cataracts.

The skeleton of patients with MFS typically displays multiple deformities including arachnodactyly (ie, abnormally long and thin digits), dolichostenomelia (ie, long limbs relative to trunk length), pectus deformities (ie, pectus excavatum and pectus carinatum), and thoracolumbar scoliosis.[10, 11]

In the cardiovascular system, aortic dilatation, aortic regurgitation, and aneurysms [12]  are the most worrisome clinical findings.[1, 3, 4] Mitral valve prolapse that requires valve replacement can occur as well. Ocular findings include myopia, cataracts, retinal detachment, and superior dislocation of the lens.[13]

Given the variable expressivity of MFS, no single sign is pathognomic; the diagnosis is made on clinical grounds on the basis of typical abnormalities. In one study, the physical examination features with the highest diagnostic yield were as follows[14] :

No specific laboratory test exists with which to make the diagnosis of MFS; however, molecular genetic testing can facilitate diagnosis of MFS in certain clinical situations. Skeletal abnormalities are assessed with radiography, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Ocular abnormalities are assessed with ultrasonography (US), slit-lamp examination, and keratometry. Cardiovascular abnormalities are assessed with electrocardiography (ECG), echocardiography, MRI, and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA).

No specific surgical procedure cures MFS; rather, specific medical and surgical interventions may ameliorate certain aspects of the syndrome. 

The majority of medical therapy as it relates to MFS has been targeted at preventing cardiovascular compromise,[9, 15, 16]  with beta blockers and afterload-reducing agents used to reduce stress on the aortic and mitral valves and the aortic root.[17]  

Mitral valve regurgitation may become so severe that medical therapy must be replaced with surgical intervention. Mitral valve repair is undertaken if possible, to delay eventual mitral valve replacement. The ascending aorta (aortic root) or the incompetent aortic valve may also require repair.

Scoliosis is the most common major skeletal deformity encountered in patients with MFS that necessitates intervention, but no specific medicinal intervention exists to treat it. Nonoperative treatments (eg, bracing) are usually unsuccessful. The major indication for surgery for the musculoskeletal system involves progression of moderate-to-severe scoliosis. Posterior spinal fusion and segmental spinal instrumentation, along with autogenous bone grafting, are the mainstay of treatment. 

Pathophysiology and Etiology

Over many years, several investigators have studied various molecules found in the extracellular matrix in attempts to elucidate the cause of MFS.[18, 16] These molecules have included collagen, elastin, hyaluronic acid, and fibrillin. Sakai et al identified fibrillin, a 350-kd protein, by using monoclonal antibodies raised against myofibrils.[19] Immunofluorescence studies were then used to compare the reactivity in both healthy subjects and those with MFS. During this period, similar technology was used to construct a genetic exclusion map that led to the localization of the defect to chromosome 15 (bands q15-q23).

Several point mutations have been identified in the fibrillin gene, most of which affect cysteine residues within the microfibril. Thus, these mutations are thought to cause defective fibrillin to be produced. Fibrillin's structure and function are altered by abnormal protein folding due to the alteration of bonding between cysteine residues, which in turn causes defective microfibril production.

Mutations in the FBN1 locus of the fibrillin gene on chromosome 15 have been linked to MFS and other distinct clinical entities with similar findings.

Epidemiology

The estimated incidence of MFS ranges from 1 in 5000 to 2-3 in 10,000 persons.[1] The mutation in the fibrillin gene causes pleiotropic effects; thus, a wide range of phenotypic features is derived from a single gene mutation. Several other diseases have presentations similar to MFS, making it exceedingly difficult to determine the exact incidence.

Prognosis

Advances in the management of the cardiovascular manifestations of MFS have led to a significant decrease in the morbidity and mortality that are associated with this condition. Before the advent of pharmacologic and surgical therapy for aortic root and valvular disease, the life expectancy for patients with MFS was about two thirds that of the healthy population. Aortic dissection and congestive heart failure due to aortic and mitral valvular anomalies accounted for over 90% of the known causes of death.

Patient longevity now approaches that of persons without MFS, though cardiovascular compromise is still the most common cause of patient death, likely due to sudden death in the previously undiagnosed patient and a new diagnosis in those whose disease process has progressed beyond the scope of medical or surgical cure.

Physical Examination

Given the variable expressivity of Marfan syndrome (MFS), no single sign is pathognomic. The diagnosis is made on clinical grounds on the basis of typical abnormalities (see the image below).



View Image

Adult with Marfan syndrome. Note tall and thin build, disproportionately long arms and legs, and kyphoscoliosis.

The cardiac, skeletal, and ocular systems are generally more focused upon for MFS diagnostic criteria; however, other tissues, including skeletal muscle, fat, skin, fascia, and the respiratory tract, may be affected in this condition as well.[18, 16]  In a prospective study by Sponseller et al, the physical examination features with the highest diagnostic yield were as follows[14] :

Clinical Diagnostic Criteria for Marfan Syndrome

The following list describes the most common clinical findings and the revised Berlin criteria (1986) for diagnosis of MFS. In 1996, the Ghent criteria updated the previous guidelines to include greater emphasis on the skeletal findings, as well as those of the family and genetic history. The Ghent criteria were subsequently updated in 2010 (see below),[20, 21, 22, 23]  the main difference from the 1996 criteria being that more weight was given to aortic root aneurysm and ectopia lentis. (See Genetics of Marfan Syndrome.) 

Skeletal system

For the skeletal system involvement to be used as criteria for the diagnosis, at least two major criteria or one major criterion plus two minor criteria must be present.

Major skeletal system criteria are as follows:

Minor skeletal system criteria are as follows:

Ocular system

For ocular system involvement to be used as diagnostic criteria, the major criterion or at least two minor criteria must be present.[13]

The ocular system major criterion is ectopia lentis (lens dislocation).[24]

Minor ocular system criteria are as follows:

Cardiovascular system

For cardiovascular system involvement to be considered diagnostic criteria, only one of the major or minor criteria must be present.[25, 26]

Major cardiovascular system criteria are as follows:

Minor cardiovascular system criteria are as follows:

Pulmonary system

For pulmonary system involvement to be considered diagnostic criteria, one of the minor criteria must be present.[25]

No major pulmonary system criteria exist.

Minor pulmonary system criteria are as follows:

Skin and integument

For skin and integument involvement to be considered diagnostic criteria, the major criteria or one of the minor criteria must be present.

The major skin and integument criterion is lumbosacral dural ectasia, as depicted by computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

The minor skin and integument criteria are as follows:

Family history

For the family history to be considered contributory to a diagnosis of MFS, one of the major criteria must be present.

The major family history criterion is a parent, child, or sibling who meets the following diagnostic criteria independently:

No minor family history criteria exist.

Requirements for a diagnosis of MFS

Requirements for a diagnosis of MFS include the following:

Revised (2010) Ghent criteria

In the 2010 revised Ghent nosology for MFS,[20, 23] diagnosis of the syndrome is based on seven rules.[22] In the absence of a family history, the following four criteria lead to the diagnosis of MFS:

In the presence of a family history, the following three criteria lead to the diagnosis of MFS:

Laboratory Studies

No specific laboratory test exists with which to make the diagnosis of Marfan syndrome (MFS).

Molecular genetic testing can be performed to assist in making the diagnosis of MFS in the following two clinical situations:

It is known that the FBN1 locus is associated with MFS; however, it is possible that other genes may cause a marfanoid habitus with phenotypic manifestations similar to those seen in MFS.[27]  The role of molecular genetics testing in the sporadic case is minor. In general, the diagnosis is made on a clinical basis using the previously described Ghent criteria (see Presentation).

Imaging Studies

Skeletal system

Standard radiography

Hand radiographs may be taken to demonstrate the typical finding of arachnodactyly. Specifically, the metacarpal index can be calculated by measuring the ratio of the average length and width of the second through fourth metacarpals. A ratio of more than 8.8 in males and 9.9 in females is indicative of arachnodactyly. Camptodactyly can be associated with MFS; this abnormal flexion at the interphalangeal (IP) joint should be noted clinically and on standard radiographs.

Spine radiographs may demonstrate a variety of abnormalities. Many patients are affected by scoliosis. Posteroanterior (PA) and lateral radiographs of the spine demonstrate the severity of the scoliotic curve and any thoracic lordotic or thoracolumbar kyphotic deformity. Thoracic lordosis, if present, should be addressed, as it can restrict pulmonary function. Thoracic lordosis is also a contraindication to the use of bracing on a scoliosis that is present at a lower level. Vertebral height is typically greater than normal. Spondylolisthesis is more prevalent in MFS and usually occurs at L5-S1.

Anteroposterior (AP) radiographs of the pelvis may demonstrate protrusio acetabuli, which occurs frequently in MFS. This condition may be present and progressive during childhood until it becomes symptomatic after the patient reaches maturity. Developmental dislocation of the hip may also occur; this is likely due to the patient's overall ligamentous laxity. The dislocated or subluxed hip is easily visualized on the AP and frogleg lateral views in the pediatric patient.

Chest radiographs (PA and lateral) may demonstrate pectus excavatum or carinatum, which may be found in patients with MFS. The anterior chest deformity is most easily detected when the chest is tilted in the axial plane.

Foot radiographs (AP and lateral weightbearing views) may demonstrate pes planovalgus secondary to the ligamentous laxity that is found in patients with MFS.

Skull radiographs (AP and lateral) may demonstrate a high arched palate, increased skull height, and an enlarged frontal sinus.

Computed tomography

Axial computed tomography (CT) images of the hips can be taken in order to detect subtle protrusio acetabuli.

Magnetic resonance imaging

Axial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the hip can also be taken to detect subtle protrusio acetabuli. Dural ectasia, which involves enlargement of the thecal sac that contains cerebrospinal fluid (especially common in the sacral region), can be identified on MRI.

Ocular system

Ultrasonography (US) of the globe may demonstrate megalocornea that occasionally occurs with MFS. The axial length of the cornea is increased (normal length in adults, < 1 cm).

Cardiovascular system

Once electrocardiography (ECG) shows abnormal findings in the patient with MFS, transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) or MRI is usually the next modality that is used to elucidate any clinically significant structural abnormalities.

To identify aortic root enlargement, either a cross-sectional echocardiogram in the parasternal long-axis view or a standard MRI should be performed. This enlargement typically occurs near the sinuses of Valsalva, although the ascending aorta and more distal aspect of the aorta may be involved (associated with a worse overall prognosis).

Once an echocardiogram or MRI is obtained, the patient's results can be compared with their body size with the use of nomograms that are appropriate for the patient's age. The following equation describes how the aortic root dimensions are obtained for comparison with normal levels:

where BSA stands for body surface area.

Because the aortic root diameter typically does not change, the expected aortic root diameter (determined with the above equation) is then compared to the patient's actual aortic root dimensions as seen on either echocardiography or MRI. The normal ratio should approximate 1.0. If the ratio is greater than 1.18, the patient is likely undergoing aortic root enlargement with an increased likelihood of aortic valvular abnormalities and dissection.

In patients with MFS, the risk of developing aortic regurgitation is directly related to the overall size of the aortic root. In patients with roots that are less than 40 mm in diameter, the risk of developing aortic regurgitation is remote; however, in patients with roots greater than 60 mm, the aortic regurgitation is almost always present.

Mitral valve prolapse may also be detected via echocardiographic analysis. One study demonstrated a unique anatomic abnormality that was thought to be specific for MFS. These authors found that all visible chordae tendineae arose from the posterior left ventricular wall rather than from one of the major papillary muscles.

Because vascular dilation beyond the aortic root can be found in MFS, thoracoabdominal magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) may be useful by providing a complete assessment of the arterial system.[28]

Other Tests

Ocular system

A slit-lamp examination is performed with full pupillary dilatation in order to characterize lens abnormalities. The most worrisome finding is that of retinal detachment, which may herald the onset of blindness. Lens dislocation can be diagnosed and usually occurs in a superolateral direction, though other directions are possible. Iridodonesis (fluttering of the iris) is also a common finding with ectopia lentis. Open-angle glaucoma, severe myopia, and cataracts are more common in patients with MFS and can be diagnosed via slit-lamp examination as well.

Keratometry is a study of the radius of curvature of the cornea. In general, patients with MFS have flatter corneas, and increasing flatness is associated with ectopia lentis.

Cardiovascular system

ECG is useful because valvular abnormalities are common in MFS; atrial and ventricular electrical conduction abnormalities, as well as cardiomyopathy, may be present in some patients. ECG represents the best initial screening test for cardiac dysfunction in MFS because more than 80% of the patients have cardiac dysfunction over the course of their lives. Common findings on ECG include T-wave inversions (mitral valve prolapse) and the development of anterior electrical forces across the precordial leads (pectus excavatum or cardiomegaly with leftward heart shift).

Approach Considerations

No specific surgical procedure exists to cure Marfan syndrome (MFS); however, specific medical and surgical interventions may ameliorate certain aspects of the syndrome. System-specific treatment options are discussed below. Any evidence of aortic dilatation must be treated medically or surgically, before any spinal reconstruction is attempted for scoliosis. Any evidence of imminent cardiac compromise would preclude surgical intervention until that issue is addressed.

Many new areas of investigation into MFS exist. With regard to the skeletal system, investigators are seeking to discover new modalities by which to delay or reduce the progression of scoliosis and assess the effect of hypermobility on joint degeneration and deformity. Cardiovascular research has focused on trying to identify patients at risk for compromise as early as possible and to determine if medications other than beta blockers are useful in terms of their cardioprotective effects.

Some preliminary data based on murine studies indicated that an angiotensin II receptor antagonist (eg, losartan) or transforming growth factor (TGF)-β neutralizing antibodies may have the potential to reverse some of the primary clinical manifestations in MFS, such as aortic root dilatation, mitral valve prolapse, lung disease, and skeletal muscle dysfunction.[7]

Researchers are also focusing on the effects of laser surgery on the cornea and lens, as well as the correction of cataracts and the preservation of sight.

Medical Therapy

The majority of medical therapy as it relates to MFS has been targeted at preventing cardiovascular compromise, which is the most likely cause of demise in this patient population.[9, 15, 16] Beta blockers and afterload-reducing agents are used to reduce stress on the aortic and mitral valves and the aortic root.[17]

Given that patients with MFS often have abnormal or prosthetic valves, all patients must receive routine antibiotic prophylaxis before undergoing procedures that could produce bacteremia. Researchers have demonstrated that the entire aorta, and especially the root, is stiffer than normal in patients with MFS.

Beta blockers have been used in attempts to decrease the onset and rate of aortic root dilatation and dissection. Studies have demonstrated a synergistic effect with regard to the reduction of aortic stiffness, decreased vascular resistance, and improved cardiac compliance when nitroprusside and beta blockers are used concomitantly.

Beta blockade is used because it is believed to reduce both inotropy and chronotropy and thereby reduce the stress on the aortic root. Nitroprusside reduces overall systemic vascular resistance, which serves to reduce overall afterload and stress on the heart. Whether these effects translate into decreased morbidity and mortality at this time is unclear, no long-term studies have been performed yet. Calcium-channel blockers (eg, verapamil) are being investigated to assess their effects on cardiovascular physiology in patients with MFS.

Scoliosis is the most common major skeletal deformity encountered in patients with MFS that necessitates intervention. No specific medicinal intervention exists to treat scoliosis. Nonoperative means of treatment (eg, bracing) may be attempted but are usually unsuccessful. Scoliosis occurs in approximately 50-70% of patients with MFS and differs from idiopathic adolescent scoliosis with regard to curve pattern, progression, and symptoms.[29] The double major right thoracic–left lumbar curve is the most common type among patients with MFS, whereas a single pattern is usually seen in the idiopathic type. Pelvic obliquity is uncommon in both types, however.

Unfortunately, these patients often have an earlier onset of scoliosis with severely rigid, painful, and deforming curves, as well as a high incidence of curve progression. The curve progression may average 7-10° per year after the onset of scoliosis, and the curve often progresses rapidly in the early adolescent period during maximal vertebral growth. This is also in contrast to the idiopathic type, which is typically not painful and is not as progressively deforming as the scoliosis in patients with MFS. Scoliosis, in combination with poor musculature and chest deformities, can cause significant respiratory compromise, which mandates early detection and prevention, if possible, in this patient population.

Nonoperative intervention for the scoliosis typically involves observation followed by the use of a thoracolumbosacral orthosis (TLSO) if the curve is mild and reveals signs of progression. Bracing is controversial; many surgeons believe that the bulk of curves in patients with MFS progress regardless of bracing and thus require operative intervention to prevent worsening deformity.

For patients with curves less than 25°, observation and serial radiographs every 3-4 months is the recommended management. When the curve is in the range of 25-40°, Milwaukee bracing or an underarm TLSO is used. This may be a bridge to future surgical intervention. Bracing is only used in patients with mild curves (ie, 25-40°) and no sagittal plane deformity (ie, thoracic lordosis or lumbar kyphosis). Bracing is not indicated for curves that are rigid, large, or have associated sagittal deformities.

Surgical Therapy

Mitral valve regurgitation may become so severe that medical therapy must be replaced with surgical intervention. The mitral valve is often found to have a dilated anulus, redundant and flaccid cusps, and ruptured chordae tendineae. Mitral valve repair is undertaken if possible, to delay the eventual mitral valve replacement; this is done because these patients often present at a young age and may require further reconstructive surgery later. Surgical repair also preserves papillary muscle function and obviates chronic anticoagulation, unlike artificial valve replacement.

The ascending aorta (aortic root) or the incompetent aortic valve may also require repair. Either a composite graft or a valve-sparing technique is performed.[30] The valve-sparing technique is usually performed in patients whose aorta has dilated to approximately 50 mm. Patients with widely dilated aortic roots or significantly attenuated aortic cusps typically undergo a composite graft repair. This is also the procedure of choice in the case of an acute aortic root dissection. Some surgeons advocate prophylactic composite grafting in patients who have a history of increasing aortic dilatation and a family history of sudden cardiovascular death.

The most important aspect in the preoperative evaluation of patients with MFS is to rule out any imminent cardiac compromise. A complete cardiac workup, including electrocardiography (ECG) followed by echocardiography, is mandatory. It is well known that aortic dilatation and subsequent rupture can develop throughout these patients' childhood and adult life; thus, one must be diligent to exclude these entities before any surgical undertaking. Any evidence of aortic dilatation must be treated medically or surgically before any spinal reconstruction is attempted.

The major indication for surgery for the musculoskeletal system involves progression of moderate-to-severe scoliosis. Chest-wall deformities may also be so severe that they impact cardiopulmonary mechanics; these can be surgically corrected as well. In the past, patients with MFS did not have these chest-wall deformities addressed, and most died at an early age due to intrinsic cardiovascular disease. The advent of successful aortic root surgery as well as aortic and mitral valve replacement has changed the overall long-term outlook for patients with the disease.

Adequate treatment should be provided for those with scoliosis to reduce pain, to improve overall cosmetic appearance, and, most important, to improve pulmonary mechanics through reduction of spinal and chest-wall deformities.

It must be kept in mind that surgery for MFS differs from surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. These differences must be taken into account in surgical planning.[29]

As previously described, bracing can be considered in patients with mild curves (see Medical Therapy). However, most patients with MFS will have significant curve progression that eventually warrants surgical intervention. Patients with curves greater than 40-50º or with associated abnormal sagittal curvature deformities require surgery.

Posterior spinal fusion and segmental spinal instrumentation, along with autogenous bone grafting, are the mainstays of treatment. Most authors agree that scoliosis can be corrected with this approach; however, the overall incidence of complications varies in different series. Pseudoarthrosis and loss of correction can occur and are problematic; the incidence figures range from 12% to 40%.

Most authors recommend aggressive bone grafting, rigid internal fixation, and adequate patient surveillance postoperatively to diagnose complications early in the clinical course. Sagittal malalignment (kyphotic deformity) may require an anterior fusion (excision of disks) followed by posterior spinal fusion and segmental spinal instrumentation to achieve satisfactory correction of the sagittal alignment.

Complications of scoliosis surgery for MFS have been well reviewed by Levy et al.[31]  

What is Marfan syndrome (MFS)?What is the pathophysiology of Marfan syndrome (MFS)?What is the incidence of Marfan syndrome (MFS)?What is the prognosis of Marfan syndrome (MFS)?How is Marfan syndrome (MFS) diagnosed?Which physical findings are characteristic of Marfan syndrome (MFS)?What are the Ghent criteria for diagnosis of Marfan syndrome (MFS)?What are skeletal system criteria for diagnosis of Marfan syndrome (MFS)?What are the ocular system criterion for diagnosis of Marfan syndrome (MFS)?What are the cardiovascular system criteria for diagnosis of Marfan syndrome (MFS)?What are the pulmonary system criteria for diagnosis of Marfan syndrome (MFS)?What is the skin and integument criterion for diagnosis of Marfan syndrome (MFS)?What are the family history criterion for diagnosis of Marfan syndrome (MFS)?What are requirements for a diagnosis of Marfan syndrome (MFS)?Which criteria must be met for a diagnosis of Marfan syndrome (MFS)?What is the role of molecular genetic testing assist in the diagnosis of Marfan syndrome (MFS)?What is the role of standard radiography in the diagnosis of Marfan syndrome (MFS)?What is the role of CT scanning in the diagnosis of Marfan syndrome (MFS)?What is the role of MRI in the diagnosis of Marfan syndrome (MFS)?What is the role of ultrasonography in the diagnosis of Marfan syndrome (MFS)?How is aortic root enlargement identified during the workup for Marfan syndrome (MFS)?Which equation is used to determine aortic root dimensions in the evaluation of Marfan syndrome (MFS)?Which cardiovascular abnormalities are evaluated during the workup for Marfan syndrome (MFS)?How is the ocular system assessed during the workup for Marfan syndrome (MFS)?What is the role of ECG in the workup of Marfan syndrome (MFS)?What are the treatment options for Marfan syndrome (MFS)?What is the focus of medical therapy for Marfan syndrome (MFS)?How is scoliosis treated in patients with Marfan syndrome (MFS)?What is the role of surgery in the management of Marfan syndrome (MFS)?When is surgery indicated for the treatment of scoliosis in patients with Marfan syndrome (MFS)?What are complication of surgical therapy for Marfan syndrome (MFS)?

Author

Prashanth Inna, MBBS, MS, DNB, Consultant in Pediatric Orthopedic Surgery, Manipal Hospitals of Bangalore and Dr Malathi Manipal Hospitals, India

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Specialty Editors

Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD, Adjunct Assistant Professor, University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Pharmacy; Editor-in-Chief, Medscape Drug Reference

Disclosure: Received salary from Medscape for employment. for: Medscape.

George H Thompson, MD, Director of Pediatric Orthopedic Surgery, Rainbow Babies and Children’s Hospital, University Hospitals Case Medical Center, and MetroHealth Medical Center; Professor of Orthopedic Surgery and Pediatrics, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine

Disclosure: Received none from OrthoPediatrics for consulting; Received salary from Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics for management position; Received none from SpineForm for consulting; Received none from SICOT for board membership.

Chief Editor

Jeffrey D Thomson, MD, Professor of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Connecticut School of Medicine; Director of Orthopedic Surgery, Connecticut Children’s Medical Center; Vice President of Medical Staff, Connecticut Children's Medical Center

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Additional Contributors

Charles T Mehlman, DO, MPH, Professor of Pediatrics and Pediatric Orthopedic Surgery, Division of Pediatric Orthopedic Surgery, Director, Musculoskeletal Outcomes Research, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Acknowledgements

Khalid Channell, MD Staff Physician, Department of General Surgery, Division of Orthopedic Surgery, King Drew Medical Center

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Eleby R Washington III, MD, FACS Associate Professor, Department of Surgery, Division of Orthopedics, Charles R Drew University of Medicine and Science

Eleby R Washington III, MD, FACS is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, American College of Surgeons, American Medical Association, International College of Surgeons, and National Medical Association

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

References

  1. Ammash NM, Sundt TM, Connolly HM. Marfan syndrome-diagnosis and management. Curr Probl Cardiol. 2008 Jan. 33(1):7-39. [View Abstract]
  2. Dietz HC, Cutting GR, Pyeritz RE, Maslen CL, Sakai LY, Corson GM, et al. Marfan syndrome caused by a recurrent de novo missense mutation in the fibrillin gene. Nature. 1991 Jul 25. 352 (6333):337-9. [View Abstract]
  3. Herring JA. Orthopaedic-related syndromes: Marfan syndrome. Herring JA, ed. Tachdjian's Pediatric Orthopaedics. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Saunders; 2014. e473-81.
  4. McKusick VA. The cardiovascular aspects of Marfan's syndrome: a heritable disorder of connective tissue. Circulation. 1955 Mar. 11(3):321-42. [View Abstract]
  5. Judge DP, Dietz HC. Therapy of Marfan syndrome. Annu Rev Med. 2008 Feb 18. 59:43-59. [View Abstract]
  6. Gould RA, Sinha R, Aziz H, Rouf R, Dietz HC 3rd, Judge DP, et al. Multi-scale biomechanical remodeling in aging and genetic mutant murine mitral valve leaflets: insights into marfan syndrome. PLoS One. 2012. 7(9):e44639. [View Abstract]
  7. Matt P, Habashi J, Carrel T, Cameron DE, Van Eyk JE, Dietz HC. Recent advances in understanding Marfan syndrome: should we now treat surgical patients with losartan?. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2008 Feb. 135 (2):389-94. [View Abstract]
  8. Demetracopoulos CA, Sponseller PD. Spinal deformities in Marfan syndrome. Orthop Clin North Am. 2007 Oct. 38(4):563-72, vii. [View Abstract]
  9. Murdoch JL, Walker BA, Halpern BL, Kuzma JW, McKusick VA. Life expectancy and causes of death in the Marfan syndrome. N Engl J Med. 1972 Apr 13. 286(15):804-8. [View Abstract]
  10. Sponseller PD, Hobbs W, Riley LH 3rd, Pyeritz RE. The thoracolumbar spine in Marfan syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995 Jun. 77(6):867-76. [View Abstract]
  11. Robins PR, Moe JH, Winter RB. Scoliosis in Marfan's syndrome. Its characteristics and results of treatment in thirty-five patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1975 Apr. 57(3):358-68. [View Abstract]
  12. Mommertz G, Sigala F, Langer S, Koeppel TA, Mess WH, Schurink GW, et al. Thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair in patients with marfan syndrome. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2008 Feb. 35 (2):181-6. [View Abstract]
  13. Maumenee IH. The eye in the Marfan syndrome. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 1981. 79:684-733. [View Abstract]
  14. Sponseller PD, Erkula G, Skolasky RL, Venuti KD, Dietz HC 3rd. Improving clinical recognition of Marfan syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010 Aug 4. 92 (9):1868-75. [View Abstract]
  15. Cañadas V, Vilacosta I, Bruna I, Fuster V. Marfan syndrome. Part 2: treatment and management of patients. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2010 May. 7 (5):266-76. [View Abstract]
  16. Iams HD. Diagnosis and management of Marfan syndrome. Curr Sports Med Rep. 2010 Mar-Apr. 9(2):93-8. [View Abstract]
  17. Shores J, Berger KR, Murphy EA, Pyeritz RE. Progression of aortic dilatation and the benefit of long-term beta-adrenergic blockade in Marfan's syndrome. N Engl J Med. 1994 May 12. 330(19):1335-41. [View Abstract]
  18. Cañadas V, Vilacosta I, Bruna I, Fuster V. Marfan syndrome. Part 1: pathophysiology and diagnosis. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2010 May. 7 (5):256-65. [View Abstract]
  19. Sakai LY, Keene DR, Engvall E. Fibrillin, a new 350-kD glycoprotein, is a component of extracellular microfibrils. J Cell Biol. 1986 Dec. 103(6 pt 1):2499-509. [View Abstract]
  20. Loeys BL, Dietz HC, Braverman AC, Callewaert BL, De Backer J, Devereux RB, et al. The revised Ghent nosology for the Marfan syndrome. J Med Genet. 2010 Jul. 47 (7):476-85. [View Abstract]
  21. What is Marfan syndrome?. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Available at http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/dci/Diseases/mar/mar_diagnosis.html. Accessed: June 19, 2018.
  22. 2010 revised Ghent nosology. The Marfan Foundation. Available at http://www.marfan.org/dx/revised-ghent-nosology. 2014; Accessed: June 19, 2018.
  23. Faivre L, Collod-Beroud G, Adès L, Arbustini E, Child A, Callewaert BL, et al. The new Ghent criteria for Marfan syndrome: what do they change?. Clin Genet. 2012 May. 81 (5):433-42. [View Abstract]
  24. Pepe G, Lapini I, Evangelisti L, Attanasio M, Giusti B, Lucarini L, et al. Is ectopia lentis in some cases a mild phenotypic expression of Marfan syndrome? Need for a long-term follow-up. Mol Vis. 2007 Nov 29. 13:2242-7. [View Abstract]
  25. Cipriano GF, Peres PA, Cipriano G Jr, Arena R, Carvalho AC. Safety and cardiovascular behavior during pulmonary function in patients with Marfan syndrome. Clin Genet. 2010 Jul. 78 (1):57-65. [View Abstract]
  26. Wang R, Ma WG, Tian LX, Sun LZ, Chang Q. Valve-sparing operation for aortic root aneurysm in patients with marfan syndrome. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2010 Mar. 58(2):76-80. [View Abstract]
  27. Giacheti CM, Zanchetta S, Maranhe E, Cassab TV, Abramides DV, Souza DH, et al. A newly recognized syndrome of Marfanoid habitus; long face; hypotelorism; long, thin nose; long, thin hands and feet; and a specific pattern of language and learning disabilities. Am J Med Genet A. 2007 Dec 15. 143A (24):3137-9. [View Abstract]
  28. Mariucci EM, Lovato L, Rosati M, Palena LM, Bonvicini M, Fattori R. Dilation of peripheral vessels in Marfan syndrome: importance of thoracoabdominal MR angiography. Int J Cardiol. 2013 Sep 10. 167 (6):2928-31. [View Abstract]
  29. Gjolaj JP, Sponseller PD, Shah SA, Newton PO, Flynn JM, Neubauer PR, et al. Spinal deformity correction in Marfan syndrome versus adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: learning from the differences. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012 Aug 15. 37 (18):1558-65. [View Abstract]
  30. Gott VL, Cameron DE, Pyeritz RE, Gillinov AM, Greene PS, Stone CD, et al. Composite graft repair of Marfan aneurysm of the ascending aorta: results in 150 patients. J Card Surg. 1994 Sep. 9 (5):482-9. [View Abstract]
  31. Levy BJ, Schulz JF, Fornari ED, Wollowick AL. Complications associated with surgical repair of syndromic scoliosis. Scoliosis. 2015. 10:14. [View Abstract]
  32. Dietz HC, Loeys B, Carta L, Ramirez F. Recent progress towards a molecular understanding of Marfan syndrome. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2005 Nov 15. 139C(1):4-9.

Adult with Marfan syndrome. Note tall and thin build, disproportionately long arms and legs, and kyphoscoliosis.

Adult with Marfan syndrome. Note tall and thin build, disproportionately long arms and legs, and kyphoscoliosis.