Algorithm of diagnostics of cognitive functions development violation in children born extremally premature
https://doi.org/10.21508/1027-4065-2019-64-6-39-44
Abstract
A qualitative improvement in the management of pregnancy and delivery, optimization of General care and provision of intensive care for children born prematurely, particularly with low and extremely low body weight, significantly reduced the risk of damage to the nervous system of perinatal hypoxic-ischemic genesis. At the same time, there is a significant number of children born at low gestational age, with a significant violation of intellectual, cognitive development and behavior change. One of the assumptions about cause of improper maturation of the brain is the role of unbalanced chromosomal and genomic micro anomalies. There is provided the data on the survey of 22 children with approximately the same clinic of developmental disorders, 19 of which revealed various structural micro-damages of genesis, but their interpretation is difficult today. The algorithm of selection of children for the extended genetic examination is given.
Keywords
About the Authors
E. S. KeshishyanRussian Federation
Moscow
G. A. Alyamovskaya
Russian Federation
Moscow
E. S. Sakharova
Russian Federation
Moscow
S. G. Vorsanova
Russian Federation
Moscow
I. A. Demidova
Russian Federation
Moscow
O. S. Kurinnaya
Russian Federation
Moscow
M. A. Zelenova
Russian Federation
Moscow
I. Yu. Iourov
Russian Federation
Moscow
References
1. Baybarina E.N. Service of obstetric clinic in the Russian Federation: the results and the prospect of development. Zamestitel’ glavnogo vracha 2014; 5: 6–14 (in Russ.)
2. Montgomery T. Neurodevelopmental outcomes of high risk preterm babies Pediatria. Pediatriya. Zhurnal im. G.N. Speranskogo (Pediatria. Journal named after G.N. Speransky) 1995; 10: 73–76 (in Russ.)
3. Nosarti C., Murray R.M., Hack M. Neurodevelopmental outcomes of preterm birth from childhood to adult life. Cambridge Univercity Press, 2010; 277.
4. Carvill G.L., Mefford H.C. Microdeletion syndromes. Curr Opin Genet 2013; 23(3): 232–239. DOI: 10.1016/j.gde.2013.03.004
5. Kloosterman W.P., Hochstenbach R. Deciphering the pathogenic consequences of chromosomal aberrations in human genetic disease. Mol Cytogenet 2014; 7(1):100. DOI: 10.1186/s13039-014-0100-9
6. Riegel M. Human molecular cytogenetics: From cells to nucleotides. Genet Mol Biol 2014; 37(1): 194–209.
7. Iourov I.Y., Vorsanova S.G., Yurov Yu.B. Somatic cell genomics of brain disorders: a new opportunity to clarify genetic-environmental interactions. Cytogen Gen Res 2013; 139(3): 181–188. DOI: 10.1159/000347053.
8. Iourov I.Y., Vorsanova S.G., Yurov Yu.B. In silico molecular cytogenetics: a bioinformatic approach to prioritization of candidate genes and copy number variations for basic and clinical genome research. Mol Cytogenet 2014; 7(1): 98. DOI: 10.1186/s13039-014-0098-z
Review
For citations:
Keshishyan E.S., Alyamovskaya G.A., Sakharova E.S., Vorsanova S.G., Demidova I.A., Kurinnaya O.S., Zelenova M.A., Iourov I.Yu. Algorithm of diagnostics of cognitive functions development violation in children born extremally premature. Rossiyskiy Vestnik Perinatologii i Pediatrii (Russian Bulletin of Perinatology and Pediatrics). 2019;64(6):39-44. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21508/1027-4065-2019-64-6-39-44