Download PDFPDF
The revised Ghent nosology for the Marfan syndrome
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g.
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests


  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Re:Comments on the revised Ghent nosology for Marfan syndrome

    We would like to thank Dr. Hennekam for his comments but would like to reply to several points made by him. We agree with Dr. Hennekam that there is a good correlation between the current nosology and the FBN1 mutation uptake, but an important goal for the new nosology is to make it simpler and more easily applicable (which is not always true for the current one). There is also an important focus on the cardiovascular a...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Comments on the revised Ghent nosology for Marfan syndrome

    The Ghent criteria as proposed in 1996 are world-wide well accepted to define the diagnostic criteria for Marfan syndrome. The criteria are easy to use and work extremely well, shown by finding causative FBN1 Mutations in 97% of cases. Indeed this specificity of diagnostic criteria is amongst the highest reported in any syndromic entity. A large group of superb Marfan specialists have now suggested a revision of these cr...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Reply to: The revised Ghent nosology for the Marfan Syndrome

    To the editor

    In the July issue, Loeys and colleagues present new diagnostic criteria for Marfan Syndrome (MFS) in their manuscript "The revised Ghent nosology for the Marfan Syndrome"[1]. After publication of these Revised Ghent Marfan criteria, a manuscript was published which in part supports their opinions[2]. After complimenting Loeys with the result of their multidisciplinary effort, we would like...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.