Lessons from Midface Malformations Associated to Holoprosencephaly

  • Roger Jankowski


That a morphogenetic continuum links the different facial aspects of holoprosencephaly, from cyclopia to the single median incisor malformation, has been suspected for a long time, although no clear explanation has been proposed until now. Each of the morphogenetic steps of holoprosencephaly can actually be seen as a replaying life’s tape experiment, with the same injury occurring at slightly different time points during the formation of the eyes and the nose. Thus, to understand the spectrum of midfacial malformations associated with holoprosencephaly from an evo-devo point of view, one must recall that (1) the eyes develop from a single morphogenetic field which is split into two lateral eye primordia by an evagination of the primitive brain, (2) the first morphologic evidence of the olfactory nose appears later than the eyes, and (3) the nose was first an exclusively olfactory organ, which became also the upper part of the air-breathing system with the secondary formation of a respiratory nose between palate and skull base.


Cleft Palate Palatal Shelf Alar Cartilage Orofacial Clefting Secondary Palate 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Cobourne M (2004) The complex genetics of cleft lip and palate. Eur J Orthod 26:7–16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. DeMyer W, Zeman W et al (1964) The face predicts the brain: diagnostic significance of median facial anomalies for holoprosencephaly (arhinencephaly). Pediatrics 34(2):256–263PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Diewert V, Wang K (1992) Recent advances in primary palate and midface morphogenesis research. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 4(1):111–130PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Dubourg C, Bendavid C et al (2007) Holoprosencephaly. Orphanet J Rare Dis 2(8):1–14Google Scholar
  5. Gruss J, Matthews D (1978) Median cerebrofacial dysgenesis: the syndrome of median facial defects with hypotelorism. Cleft Palate J 15(3):275–281PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Kjaer I (1991) The midline craniofacial skeleton in holoprosencephalic fetuses. J Med Genet 28:846–855PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kjaer I, Keeling J et al (1997) Palate structure in human holoprosencephaly correlates with the facial malformation and demonstrates a new palatal development field. Am J Med Genet 73:387–392PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kjaer I, Binner Becktor K et al (2001) Face, palate, and craniofacial morphology in patients with a solitary median maxillary central incisor. Eur J Orthod 23:63–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kjaer I, Keeling J et al (2002) Midline skeletodental morphology in holoprosencephaly. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 39(3):357–363PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. McCorkell S, Ohlsson A et al (1985) Cebocephaly: CT and sonographic findings. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 6:647–649PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. McGrath P (1992) The proboscis in human cyclopia: an anatomical study in two dimensions. J Anat 181:139–149PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Roessler E, Muenke M (1998) Holoprosencephaly: a paradigm for the complex genetics of the brain development. J Inherit Metab Dis 21:481–497PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Shiota K, Yamada S et al (2007) Embryogenesis of holoprosencephaly. Am J Med Genet 143A:3079–3087PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Souza J, Siebert J et al (1990) An anatomic comparison of cebocephaly and ethmocephaly. Teratology 42:347–357PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roger Jankowski
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculté de Médecine Service ORL - CHUUniversité de LorraineNancyFrance

Personalised recommendations