Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics

, Volume 300, Issue 3, pp 491–493 | Cite as

Ehlers–Danlos syndrome and other heritable connective tissue disorders that impact pregnancies can be detected using next-generation DNA sequencing

  • Krystal VanderJagtEmail author
  • Merlin G. Butler
News and Views


Ehlers–Danlos syndromes (EDS) are a genetically heterogeneous group of inherited connective tissue disorders classified into six major types with a variable collection of findings and different inheritance patterns. Although complications occur in about one-half of pregnancies in women with EDS, the majority can have a good outcome if managed appropriately. Classic EDS is characterized by joint hypermobility, loose skin with poor healing and easy bruising, musculoskeletal problems with chronic pain and at risk for pre-term delivery. In addition, the vascular form of EDS can have cardiac anomalies, aneurysms, gastrointestinal perforation and uterine rupture during pregnancy. Due to overlapping features among the connective tissue disorders, it is difficult to categorize the disorder into specific types without detailed genetic testing which is now available through advanced genomic technology using next-generation DNA sequencing, searching genomic databases and bioinformatics approach. Therefore, obstetrical complications are variable but relate to specific connective tissue disorders requiring an exact diagnosis. There are several dozen genes causing connective tissue disorders that are currently available for testing using next-generation sequencing and bioinformatics to provide pertinent care, treatment and surveillance of the affected pregnant woman but also for her at-risk fetus related to the specific heritable condition.


Connective tissue disorders impacting pregnancies Ehlers–Danlos syndrome and obstetric complications Advanced genomic technology and next generation sequencing Genetic screening 



We thank Charlotte Weber for the excellent preparation of the manuscript.

Author contributions

KV: Literature review, manuscript writing and editing. MGB: Manuscript writing and editing.


This work was supported by National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Grant number HD02528.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Parapia LA, Jackson C (2008) Ehlers–Danlos syndrome—a historical review. Br J Haematol 141:32–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sen P, Butler MG (2018) Classic Ehlers–Danlos syndrome in a son and father with a heart transplant performed in the father. J Pediatr Genet 8(2):69–72Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Colombi M, Dordoni C, Chiarelli N, Ritelli M (2015) Differential diagnosis and diagnostic flow chart of joint hypermobility syndrome/Ehlers–Danlos syndrome hypermobility type compared to other heritable connective tissue disorders. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet 169C(1):6–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Castori M, Morlino S, Dordoni C, Celletti C, Camerota F, Ritelli M, Morrone A, Venturini M, Grammatico P, Colombi M (2012) Gynecologic and obstetric implications of the joint hypermobility syndrome (a. k. a. Ehlers–Danlos syndrome hypermobility type) in 82 Italian patients. Am J Med Genet A 158A(9):2176–2182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Karthikeyan A, Venkat-Raman N (2018) Hypermobile Ehlers–Danlos syndrome and pregnancy. Obstet Med 11(3):104–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Khalil H, Rafi J, Hla TT (2013) A case report of obstetrical management of a pregnancy with hypermobile Ehlers–Danlos syndrome and literature review. Obstet Med 6:80–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Venturella R, Quaresima P, Micieli M, Rania E, Palumbo A, Visconti F, Zullo F, Di Carlo C (2018) Non-obstetrical indications for cesarean section: a state-of-the-art review. Arch Gynecol Obstet 298(1):9–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chetty SP, Shaffer BL, Norton ME (2011) Management of pregnancy in women with genetic disorders, part 1: disorders of the connective tissue, muscle, vascular, and skeletal systems. Obstet Gynecol Surv 66(12):765–776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sorokin Y, Johnson MP, Rogowski N, Richardson DA, Evans MI (1994) Obstetric and gynecologic dysfunction in the Ehlers–Danlos syndrome. J Reprod Med 39:281–284Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pepin M, Schwarze U, Superti-Furga A, Byers PH (2000) Clinical and genetic features of Ehlers–Danlos syndrome type IV, the vascular type. N Engl J Med 342:673–680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hurst BS, Lange SS, Kullstam SM, Usadi RS, Matthews ML, Marshburn PB, Templin MA, Merriam KS (2014) Obstetric and gynecologic challenges in women with Ehlers–Danlos syndrome. Obstet Gynecol 123(3):503–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Murray ML, Pepin M, Peterson S, Byers PH (2014) Pregnancy-related deaths and complications in women with vascular Ehlers–Danlos syndrome. Genet Med 16(12):874–880CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Byers PH, Belmont J, Black J, De Backer J, Frank M, Jeunemaitre X, Johnson D, Pepin M, Robert L, Sanders L, Wheeldon N (2017) Diagnosis, natural history, and management in vascular Ehlers–Danlos syndrome. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet 175(1):40–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sundelin HE, Stephansson O, Johansson K, Ludvigsson JF (2017) Pregnancy outcome in joint hypermobility syndrome and Ehlers–Danlos syndrome. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 96(1):114–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Carness JM, Lenart MJ (2018) Spinal anaesthesia for cesarean section in a patient with vascular type Ehlers–Danlos syndrome. Anesthesiol Case Rep 2018:1924725Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kaufman CS, Butler MG (2016) Mutation in TNXB gene causes moderate to severe Ehlers–Danlos syndrome. World J Med Genet 6:17–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dutta I, Wilson H, Oteri O (2011) Pregnancy and delivery in Ehlers–Danlos syndrome (hypermobility type): review of the literature. Obstet Gynecol Int 2011:306413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Volkov N, Nisenblat V, Ohel G, Gonen R (2007) Ehlers–Danlos syndrome: insights on obstetric aspects. Obstet and Gynecol Surv 62(1):51–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Peaceman AM, Cruikshank DP (1987) Ehlers–Danlos syndrome and pregnancy: association of type IV disease with maternal death. Obstet Gynecol 69:428–431Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    DePaepe A, Thaler B, Van Gijsegem M, Van Hoecke D, Matton M (1989) Obstetrical problems in patients with Ehlers–Danlos syndrome type IV: A case report. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 33:189–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Augustin G, Kulis T, Kello N, Ivkovic V (2019) Ruptured renal artery aneurysm in pregnancy and puerperium: literature review of 53 cases. Arch Gynecol Obstet 299(4):923–931CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Beighton P, Horan F (1969) Orthopaedic aspects of the Ehlers–Danlos syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Br 51:444–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departments of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences and Pediatrics, Medical CenterUniversity of KansasKansas CityUSA

Personalised recommendations