Abstract
Ectodermal dysplasia (ED) involves the aberrant development of at least two ectodermal derivatives, such as skin, teeth, hair, sweat glands, and ocular tissue. The group of over 200 conditions is commonly classified into two major types: hypohidrotic/anhidrotic ED, in which sweat glands are either absent or significantly reduced, and hidrotic ED, in which sweat glands are normal. Ocular manifestations pertinent to patients undergoing corneal vision correction surgery include multifaceted dry eye syndrome, corneal pathology, such as recurrent erosions, scars, neovascularization, and limbal stem cell deficiency, and early-onset cataracts and glaucoma. In this article we discuss the current understanding of ED and offer factors to consider when these patients are seeking corneal refractive surgery.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Ectodermal dysplasia (ED) involves the aberrant development of at least two ectodermal derivatives, such as skin, teeth, hair, sweat glands, and ocular tissue. The group of over 200 conditions is commonly classified into hypohidrotic/anhidrotic ED and hidrotic ED 2 on the basis of sweat gland involvement |
Eyelid dysmorphology and meibomian gland atresia, aplasia, or obstruction can lead to evaporative dry eye and faster tear film breakup time in patients with ED, which increases the risk of corneal infection and refractive instability. It is more likely that this population will have multifactorial ocular surface dryness requiring aggressive dry eye management with topical cyclosporine, a slow taper of topical steroids, punctal plugs, or autologous serum |
Corneal changes in ED including erosions, vascularization, pannus, scarring, ulcers, perforation, and limbal stem cell deficiency (LSCD) are caused by recurrent infections of the eyelid margins, defective tear film formation, and primary dysplasia of the corneal epithelium. This leads to decreased reliability of topographical measurements preoperatively, an increased risk of intraoperative complications during LASIK, PRK, or SMILE, and a greater likelihood of encountering postoperative complications of delayed corneal wound healing, including infectious keratitis and epithelial ingrowth |
Even with subclinical meibomian gland dysfunction and LSCD, this population may be especially vulnerable to dry eye syndrome and complications of delayed corneal wound healing that could result in poor visual outcomes and patient dissatisfaction |
Ectodermal dysplasias (EDs), including more than 200 different disorders, involve at least two ectodermal derivatives, such as skin, teeth, hair, sweat glands, and ocular tissue [1, 2]. However, with an estimated incidence of 7/10,000 births [3], it is considered a relatively rare disease entity. The classification system of ED is quickly evolving as researchers are continuing to find molecular-genetic pathophysiology. Currently, 80 of the approximately 200 conditions have known genetic links [4]. However, for clinical diagnosis and consideration, phenotypic classification is commonly characterized by two subgroups: hypohidrotic/anhidrotic ED (HED) and hidrotic ED 2 (HED2) [5]. Table 1 summarizes the classification of ED and includes subtypes with previously reported ocular findings. HED is the more prevalent subgroup and its X-linked variety (XLHED) is much more common than the various autosomal subtypes [6, 7]. XLHED affects more male individuals than female individuals [8] and often presents as severe neonatal heat intolerance, leading to findings of hypoplasia/aplasia of the eccrine sweat glands, hair follicles, and teeth, as well as craniofacial abnormalities and periorbital pigmentation early in life [1]. The lack of eccrine sweat glands (sebaceous, submucosal, lacrimal, salivary, mammary, and meibomian glands) can result in obstructive airway conditions, atrophic rhinitis, recurrent respiratory infections, keratoconjunctivitis sicca, chronic eczema and other skin conditions, and breastfeeding difficulties [9]. With these many complications, mortality approaches 30% by 3 years of age, although for survivors of this period life expectancy is normal [3]. Milder forms of HED can be found in male and female individuals with autosomal dominant forms and in female carriers of XLHED, often leading to a definitive diagnosis much later in life [10]. Similarly, HED2 (Clouston syndrome) follows autosomal dominant inheritance, but mostly occurs in the French-Canadian population [11, 12]. Unlike HED, HED2 usually spares the sweat glands and teeth, and its ocular manifestations are typically limited to a sparsity of eyebrows and eyelashes (madarosis) [13]. With such a wide variety of phenotypic presentations, patients with ED seeking vision correction surgery for refractive error may present with relatively few obvious ocular symptoms. Therefore, it is important for ophthalmologists to be familiarized with ED and the associated ocular findings in this population.
Ectoderm gives rise to many components of the eye and associated orbital structures, with some contributions from the mesoderm. Neuroectoderm forms the retina, epithelial lining of the ciliary body and iris, and optic nerve. Surface ectoderm forms the lens and corneal epithelium, as well as the skin, hair follicles, and glands of the eyelid. Neural crest cells, which are also ectoderm-derived, give rise to Descemet’s membrane, sclera, endothelium of the cornea, orbital bones, and connective tissue. Mesoderm then contributes to the vitreous body, suspensory fibers, Bowman’s layer and stroma of the cornea, blood vessels of the eye (including scleral and corneal), extraocular muscles, and muscles of the eyelid [14, 15]. With this significant embryologic contribution to eye structures, it is understandable that ED can lead to the numerous ocular abnormalities summarized in Table 1.
Refractive error has been found in up to 43% of patients with ED [2], making it likely that these patients will seek corneal refractive surgery (CRS). In this population, it is important to evaluate for ocular surface inflammatory disease, corneal pathology including recurrent erosions, stromal scars, neovascularization, and limbal stem cell deficiency (LSCD), and early-onset cataracts and glaucoma. Table 2 references recommended testing with potential findings that have previously been reported in cases of ED.
Knowing that transient ocular surface dryness is common following laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK), photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), and small lenticule extraction (SMILE) procedures [16], physicians should be aware of an increased risk of dry eye symptoms for patients with ED. During screening examination, ophthalmologists may find defective tear film formation and reduced tear production caused by lacrimal and meibomian gland atresia, aplasia, or obstruction that are common with ED [9, 17,18,19,20]. In addition, this population is prone to craniofacial and eyelid dysmorphology, such as ankyloblepharon, trichiasis [7], and ectropion [18], that can further promote ocular surface irritation and dryness. Depending on the severity, these abnormalities may require multidisciplinary consultation, including oculoplastics. With this multifactorial pathophysiology for dry eye, it is more likely that patients with ED will necessitate aggressive management with topical cyclosporine, a slow taper of topical steroids, punctal plugs, and autologous serum. Patients must understand that dry eye syndrome (DES) carries an increased risk of refractive instability, postoperative infectious keratitis [21], and exacerbated symptoms of corneal dryness following CRS.
Since the cornea is partially derived from ectoderm, ED can also cause primary corneal dysplasia, such as LSCD [22]. The limbal stem cells replenish the corneal epithelium and inhibit the infiltration of conjunctival epithelial cells onto the cornea [23]. After LASIK, SMILE, or PRK, patients with ED with LSCD can have a higher risk of delayed epithelial healing and turnover, neovascularization, and pannus [24] resulting in corneal opacification and reduced visual acuity [23]. Furthermore, glandular abnormalities associated with ED contribute to recurrent infections of the eyelid margins and deficient tear film formation that can exacerbate underlying corneal erosions and vascularization leading to corneal ulcers, scarring, or even perforation [7, 25, 26]. Preoperatively, defective tear film formation can decrease the reliability of topographical measurements at the time of refractive screening [27]. Intraoperatively, stromal scars can increase the risk of vertical gas breakthrough during femtosecond flap creation for LASIK, and bleeding into the stroma secondary to pannus and vascularization can complicate excimer laser ablation. Postoperatively, LSCD along with pannus and blood reaching the flap interface can increase the risk of inflammatory reactions, such as diffuse lamellar keratitis and epithelial ingrowth [21]. Therefore, ophthalmologists should pay particular attention to the cornea and glands of patients with ED, who are seeking vision correction surgery, and inform them of these increased risks.
Ophthalmologists should also have a high suspicion for other common ocular abnormalities associated with ED including early-onset cataracts [28, 29] and glaucoma [20, 30]. Evaluation for these conditions may necessitate specialized imaging, such as Scheimpflug densitometry to assess for low-grade cataracts and optical coherence tomography to assess the optic nerve, especially in patients found to have elevated intraocular pressure during their screening examination.
In conclusion, for patients with ED seeking CRS, special consideration must be made to determine the extent of eyelid dysmorphology, glandular dysfunction, and corneal pathology, such as recurrent erosions, scars, neovascularization, and LSCD, associated with their disease. These conditions could potentiate intraoperative complications and unfavorable postoperative outcomes. Even with subclinical meibomian gland dysfunction and LSCD, this population may be especially vulnerable to DES and unpredictable corneal wound healing. Patients with ED that are considered candidates for CRS will need to be fully informed that their disorder carries increased risks that may necessitate substantial prophylactic measures beyond that of an average refractive surgery patient. In current scientific literature, there is abundant information on ED as a disease entity, but there are no reports concerning the outcomes of CRS in this patient population. Therefore, these recommendations are based on the most common clinical findings of ED. However, with such a wide variety of possible presentations, every patient with ED should be thoroughly evaluated concerning candidacy for corneal refractive surgery at the discretion of their ophthalmologist.
References
Wright JT, Fete M, Schneider H, et al. Ectodermal dysplasias: classification and organization by phenotype, genotype and molecular pathway. Am J Med Genet A. 2019;179(3):442–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.a.61045.
Landau-Prat D, Katowitz WR, Strong A, Katowitz JA. Ocular manifestations of ectodermal dysplasia. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2021;16(1):197. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-021-01824-2.
Meshram GG, Kaur N, Hura KS. A case report of hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia: a mini-review with latest updates. J Family Med Prim Care. 2018;7(1):264–6. https://doi.org/10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_20_17.
Itin PH. Etiology and pathogenesis of ectodermal dysplasias. Am J Med Genet A. 2014;164A(10):2472–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.a.36550.
Visinoni AF, Lisboa-Costa T, Pagnan NA, Chautard-Freire-Maia EA. Ectodermal dysplasias: clinical and molecular review. Am J Med Genet A. 2009;149A(9):1980–2002. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.a.32864.
Trzeciak WH, Koczorowski R. Molecular basis of hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia: an update. J Appl Genet. 2016;57(1):51–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13353-015-0307-4.
Tyagi P, Tyagi V, Hashim AA. Ocular and non-ocular manifestations of hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia. BMJ Case Rep. 2011;2011:bbcr0120113731. https://doi.org/10.1136/bcr.01.2011.3731.
Vasconcelos Carvalho M, Romero Souto de Sousa J, Paiva Correa de Melo F, et al. Hypohidrotic and hidrotic ectodermal dysplasia: a report of two cases. Dermatol Online J. 2013;19(7):18985.
Wohlfart S, Meiller R, Hammersen J, et al. Natural history of X-linked hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia: a 5-year follow-up study. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2020;15(1):7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-019-1288-x.
Wright JT, Grange DK, Fete M. Hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia. 2003. In: Adam MP, Ardinger HH, Pagon RA, et al., editors. GeneReviews®. Seattle (WA): University of Washington, Seattle; pp. 1993–2022. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1112/?report=classic. Accessed 2 Mar 2022.
Chappidi V, Voulligonda D, Bhogavaram B, Reddy PK. Ectodermal dysplasia: report of two cases in a family and literature review. J Family Med Prim Care. 2019;8(3):1263–5. https://doi.org/10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_48_19.
Kibar Z, Der Kaloustian VM, Brais B, Hani V, Fraser FC, Rouleau GA. The gene responsible for Clouston hidrotic ectodermal dysplasia maps to the pericentromeric region of chromosome 13q. Hum Mol Genet. 1996;5(4):543–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/5.4.543.
Mellerio J, Greenblatt D. Hidrotic ectodermal dysplasia 2. 2005. In: Adam MP, Ardinger HH, Pagon RA, et al., editors. GeneReviews®. Seattle (WA): University of Washington, Seattle; 1993–2022. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1200/. Accessed 2 Mar 2022.
Sadler TW. Eye. In: Sadler TW. Langman’s medical embryology. 14th ed. Wolters Kluwer; pp. 360–369. 2019. https://meded-lwwhealthlibrary-com.mwu.idm.oclc.org/content.aspx?sectionid=197772090&bookid=2487. Accessed 4 Mar 2022.
Tawfik HA, Abdulhafez MH, Fouad YA, Dutton JJ. Embryologic and fetal development of the human eyelid. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;32(6):407–14. https://doi.org/10.1097/IOP.0000000000000702.
D’Souza S, James E, Swarup R, Mahuvakar S, Pradhan A, Gupta K. Algorithmic approach to diagnosis and management of post-refractive surgery dry eye disease. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2020;68(12):2888–94. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijo.IJO_1957_20.
Ansari A, Pillarisetty LS. Embryology, Ectoderm. [Updated 2021 May 8]. In: StatPearls. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls. 2022. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK539836/. Accessed 2 Mar 2022.
Zhang X, Xu L, Li X, Li C, Zhang H. Lower lid ectropion in hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia. Case Rep Ophthalmol Med. 2015;2015: 952834. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/952834.
Kaercher T. Ocular symptoms and signs in patients with ectodermal dysplasia syndromes. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2004;242(6):495–500. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-004-0868-0.
Chandravanshi SL. Hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia: a case report. Orbit. 2020;39(4):298–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/01676830.2019.1688358.
Sahay P, Bafna RK, Reddy JC, Vajpayee RB, Sharma N. Complications of laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2021;69(7):1658–69. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijo.IJO_1872_20.
Di Iorio E, Kaye SB, Ponzin D, et al. Limbal stem cell deficiency and ocular phenotype in ectrodactyly-ectodermal dysplasia-clefting syndrome caused by p63 mutations. Ophthalmology. 2012;119(1):74–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.06.044.
Le Q, Xu J, Deng SX. The diagnosis of limbal stem cell deficiency. Ocul Surf. 2018;16(1):58–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtos.2017.11.002.
Heiland MB, Moshirfar M, Rosen DB, Ronquillo YC, Hoopes PC. Dyskeratosis congenita and corneal refractive surgery. Ophthalmol Ther. 2019;8(3):361–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40123-019-0200-z.
Käsmann B, Ruprecht KW. Ocular manifestations in a father and son with EEC syndrome. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1997;235(8):512–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00947009.
Felipe AF, Abazari A, Hammersmith KM, Rapuano CJ, Nagra PK, Peiro BM. Corneal changes in ectrodactyly-ectodermal dysplasia-cleft lip and palate syndrome: case series and literature review. Int Ophthalmol. 2012;32(5):475–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-012-9585-6.
Asena L, Altınörs DD, Cezairlioğlu Ş, Bölük SO. Effect of dry eye on Scheimpflug imaging of the cornea and elevation data. Can J Ophthalmol. 2017;52(3):313–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjo.2016.11.005.
Wallis C, Ip FS, Beighton P. Cataracts, alopecia, and sclerodactyly: a previously apparently undescribed ectodermal dysplasia syndrome on the island of Rodrigues. Am J Med Genet. 1989;32(4):500–3. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.1320320415.
Hazen PG, Zamora I, Bruner WE, Muir WA. Premature cataracts in a family with hidrotic ectodermal dysplasia. Arch Dermatol. 1980;116(12):1385–7.
Dubey S, Bhoot M, Jain K. Hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia: a rare disorder with bilateral infantile glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2019;28(4):e58–60. https://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0000000000001156.
Cluzeau C, Hadj-Rabia S, Jambou M, et al. Only four genes (EDA1, EDAR, EDARADD, and WNT10A) account for 90% of hypohidrotic/anhidrotic ectodermal dysplasia cases. Hum Mutat. 2011;32(1):70–2. https://doi.org/10.1002/humu.21384.
Sutton VR, van Bokhoven H. TP63-related disorders. 2010. In: Adam MP, Ardinger HH, Pagon RA, et al, editors. GeneReviews®. Seattle (WA): University of Washington, Seattle; 1993–2022. Accessed 11 Apr 2021.
Tomčíková D, Bušányová B, Krásnik V, Gerinec A. Marshall and stickler syndrome in one family. Cesk Slov Oftalmol. 2018;74(3):108–11. https://doi.org/10.31348/2018/1/5-3-2018.
Okubo A, Fujii K, Arimura A, et al. Hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia with strabismus. J Dermatol. 2018;45(7):e191–2. https://doi.org/10.1111/1346-8138.14252.
Çalişkan S, Köşker M, Biçer T, Çelikay O, Gürdal C. Ocular findings in a patient with ectodermal dysplasia. Retin Cases Brief Rep. 2018;12(3):219–23. https://doi.org/10.1097/ICB.0000000000000488.
Acknowledgements
Funding
No funding or sponsorship was received for the publication of this article.
Medical Writing and Editorial Assistance
Special thanks to Yasmyne Ronquillo MD and Briana Ply MD for their assistance in editing.
Authorship
All named authors meet the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) criteria for authorship for this manuscript, take responsibility for the integrity of the work, and have given final approval to the version to be published.
Authorship Contributions
Majid Moshirfar MD contributed to the perspective conception. Duncan J Williams OMS-IV wrote the first draft of the manuscript. All authors contributed to revisions.
Disclosures
Majid Moshirfar, Duncan J Williams, Yasmyne Ronquillo and Briana Ply confirm that they have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Compliance with Ethics Guidelines
This article is based on previously conducted studies and does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Data Availability
Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Moshirfar, M., Williams, D.J., Ronquillo, Y.C. et al. Potential Risks of Corneal Refractive Surgery in Patients with Ectodermal Dysplasia. Ophthalmol Ther 11, 1281–1289 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40123-022-00515-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40123-022-00515-w