Clinical reappraisal of SHORT syndrome with PIK3R1 mutations: towards recommendation for molecular testing and management

International audienceSHORT syndrome has historically been defined by its acronym: short stature (S), hyperextensibility of joints and/or inguinal hernia (H), ocular depression (O), Rieger abnormality (R) and teething delay (T). More recently several research groups have identified PIK3R1 mutations as responsible for SHORT syndrome. Knowledge of the molecular etiology of SHORT syndrome has permitted a reassessment of the clinical phenotype. The detailed phenotypes of 32 individuals with SHORT syndrome and PIK3R1 mutation, including eight newly ascertained individuals, were studied to fully define the syndrome and the indications for PIK3R1 testing. The major features described in the SHORT acronym were not universally seen and only half (52%) had 4 or more of the classic features. The commonly observed clinical features of SHORT syndrome seen in the cohort included IUGR \textless 10(th) percentile, postnatal growth restriction, lipoatrophy and the characteristic facial gestalt. Anterior chamber defects and insulin resistance or diabetes were also observed but were not as prevalent. The less specific, or minor features of SHORT syndrome include teething delay, thin wrinkled skin, speech delay, sensorineural deafness, hyperextensibility of joints and inguinal hernia. Given the high risk of diabetes mellitus, regular monitoring of glucose metabolism is warranted. An echocardiogram, ophthalmological and hearing assessments are also recommended

Telemedicine and type 1 diabetes: is technology per se sufficient to improve glycaemic control?

International audienceAIM: In the TELEDIAB-1 study, the Diabeo system (a smartphone coupled to a website) improved HbA1c by 0.9% vs controls in patients with chronic, poorly controlled type 1 diabetes. The system provided two main functions: automated advice on the insulin doses required; and remote monitoring by teleconsultation. The question is: how much did each function contribute to the improvement in HbA1c? METHODS: Each patient received a smartphone with an insulin dose advisor (IDA) and with (G3 group) or without (G2 group) the telemonitoring/teleconsultation function. Patients were classified as "high users" if the proportion of "informed" meals using the IDA exceeded 67% (median) and as "low users" if not. Also analyzed was the respective impact of the IDA function and teleconsultations on the final HbA1c levels. RESULTS: Among the high users, the proportion of informed meals remained stable from baseline to the end of the study 6months later (from 78.1+/-21.5% to 73.8+/-25.1%; P=0.107), but decreased in the low users (from 36.6+/-29.4% to 26.7+/-28.4%; P=0.005). As expected, HbA1c improved in high users from 8.7% [range: 8.3-9.2%] to 8.2% [range: 7.8-8.7%] in patients with (n=26) vs without (n=30) the benefit of telemonitoring/teleconsultation (-0.49+/-0.60% vs -0.52+/-0.73%, respectively; P=0.879). However, although HbA1c also improved in low users from 9.0% [8.5-10.1] to 8.5% [7.9-9.6], those receiving support via teleconsultation tended to show greater improvement than the others (-0.93+/-0.97 vs -0.46+/-1.05, respectively; P=0.084). CONCLUSION: The Diabeo system improved glycaemic control in both high and low users who avidly used the IDA function, while the greatest improvement was seen in the low users who had the motivational support of teleconsultations