Objective: To date, Micro syndrome has been reported in only three children
from one family. We describe an additional 14 children from 11 families.
Design: Retrospective case series.
Participants: Fourteen children from 11 families attending one of five Brit
ish hospitals.
Main Outcome Measures: The following features were documented: pre- and pos
toperative eye findings, electrophysiologic analysis, systemic abnormalitie
s, development, neuroimaging, genealogy, geographic origin of family.
Results: We expand and modify the description of ocular and electrophysiolo
gic findings in Micro syndrome. The eye findings of microphakia, microphtha
lmos, characteristic lens opacity, and atonic pupils were the presenting fe
ature in all infants and were the most reliable diagnostic signs in the imm
ediate postnatal period. Cortical visual impairment, microcephaly, and deve
lopmental delay were not always detectable initially; they developed in all
children by 6 months of age. Microgenitalia were a useful diagnostic clue
in affected males only. Therefore, eye features were more consistently usef
ul in determining diagnosis than dysmorphology or brain imaging. The famili
es of all the children originate from the Muslim population of Northern Pak
istan, Inheritance is likely to be autosomal recessive.
Conclusions: Micro syndrome usually presents to the ophthalmologist, who ma
y be able to make the diagnosis on the basis of characteristic eye findings
combined with ethnic origin. Initially, the nature and severity of nonopht
halmic features are not apparent. Early diagnosis of the underlying conditi
on is important to guide management of the cataracts, glaucoma, and develop
mental delay. It is helpful for the family and medical staff to be aware of
the low level of vision that develops despite optimal ophthalmic intervent
ion. Genetic counseling extending into the wider family is particularly imp
ortant in view of the high rate of consanguinity. (C) 2001 by the American
Academy of Ophthalmology.