Unraveling mixed gonadal dysgenesis

challenges in prenatal diagnosis and clinical management

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29327/218041.32.37-1

Keywords:

disorders of sexual differentiation, mixed gonadal dysgenesis, prenatal diagnosis, polycystic renal malformation, mosaicism, gender assignment

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to report a case of mixed gonadal dysgenesis (MGD) diagnosed during pregnancy, highlighting the importance of prenatal diagnosis, clinical management, and genetic counseling. CASE REPORT: The patient was a 20-year-old woman referred due to a fetal ultrasound showing evidence of renal abnormalities. At the 30-week ultrasound, a dysplastic right kidney with multiple cysts and ambiguous genitalia suggestive of a disorder of sexual development was observed. Fetal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) revealed a dysplastic kidney with multiple cysts. There was an image suggestive of a hypoplastic scrotum and an undefined genital tubercle. The fetal karyotype showed a chromosomal constitution of mosaicism 45,X[28]/46,XY[2], consistent with the diagnosis of MGD. On neonatal clinical examination of the genitalia, there was a phallus measuring 3 cm with hypospadias but no urethral opening, and a palpable gonad in the left labioscrotal swelling. The right gonad was intra-abdominal, and the urethra opened into a wide urogenital sinus. Micrognathia, a single left palmar crease, clinodactyly of the fifth fingers, and hypoplastic nails were also observed. The abdominal ultrasound showed a right kidney with multiple cysts of varying sizes. DISCUSSION: MGD is a complex condition that can manifest in various ways. The discussed case highlights the importance of a multidisciplinary approach in the management of gonadal dysgenesis cases, considering not only aesthetic aspects but also the functionality and health of the patient. The choice of gender assignment should be made after careful evaluation and in collaboration with the parents, taking into account emotional and social implications. CONCLUSION: Early diagnosis and proper follow-up are crucial for the management of MGD. Collaboration between different medical specialties and the involvement of the parents in decision-making are essential to ensure appropriate and informed treatment. This case highlights the need for continuous support and careful planning for the child's future.

References

Gantt PA, Byrd JR, Greenblatt RB, McDonough PG. A clinical and cytogenetic study of fifteen patients with 45,X/46XY gonadal dysgenesis. Fertil Steril. 1980 Sep;34(3):216-21.

Ahmed SF, Khwaja O, Hughes IA. The role of a clinical score in the assessment of ambiguous genitalia. BJU Int. 2000 Jan;85(1):120-4.

Prader A. Der genitalbefund beim pseudo-hermaphroditismus femininus des kongenitalen adrenogenitalen syndrome. Helv Paediat Acta 1954;9:231.

Stambough K, Magistrado L, Perez-Milicua G. Evaluation of ambiguous genitalia. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Oct;31(5):303–8.

Lee PA, Houk CP, Ahmed SF, Hughes IA, LWPES Consensus Group; ESPE Consensus Group. Consensus Statement on Management of Intersex Disorders. Pediatrics. 2006 Aug 1;118(2):e488–500.

López Soto Á, Bueno González M, Urbano Reyes M, Carlos Moya Jiménez L, Beltrán Sánchez A, Garví Morcillo J, Velasco Martínez M, Luis Meseguer González J, Martínez Rivero I, García Izquierdo O. Imaging in fetal genital anomalies. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2023 Apr;283:13–24.

Danish RK. Intersex problems in the neonate. Indian J Pediatr. 1982 Jul;49(4):555–75.

Meizner I. The ‘tulip sign’: a sonographic clue for in-utero diagnosis of severe hypospadias. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Mar;19(3):317

Cafici D, Iglesias A. Prenatal diagnosis of severe hypospadias with two- and three-dimensional sonography. J Ultrasound Med. 2002 Dec;21(12):1423–6.

Canella PRB. Sexo, sexualidade e gênero. Rev Bras Sex Humana [Internet]. 2020 Sep 19 [Cited 2024 Aug 27];17(1). Available from: https://sbrash.emnuvens.com.br/revista_sbrash/article/view/445. doi: 10.35919/rbsh.v17i1.445.

Cools M, Pleskacova J, Stoop H, Hoebeke P, Van Laecke E, Drop SL, Lebl J, Oosterhuis JW, Looijenga LH, Wolffenbuttel KP; Mosaicism Collaborative Group. Gonadal pathology and tumor risk in relation to clinical characteristics in patients with 45,X/46,XY mosaicism. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2011 Jul;96(7):E1171–80.

Published

2024-09-24 — Updated on 2024-12-02

Versions

How to Cite

1.
Freitas Kelsch E de, Favero MF, Cézar TM, Müller IK, Telles JAB, Rosa RFM. Unraveling mixed gonadal dysgenesis: challenges in prenatal diagnosis and clinical management. RBUS [Internet]. 2024 Dec. 2 [cited 2025 Jan. 18];32(37). Available from: https://revistarbus.sbus.org.br/rbus/article/view/5