Resumen Introducción: La deleción 22q11.2 ocurre con una frecuencia de 1:4,000-1:6,000 nacidos vivos, mientras que la deleción 10p13p14 es detectada en 1:200,000 recién nacidos. Ambas deleciones comparten características clínicas similares tales como defectos cardiacos congénitos y anomalías inmunológicas. Objetivo: Identificar la deleción 22q11.2 en pacientes mexicanos con dismorfismo craneofacial sugestivo de síndrome DiGeorge o velocardiofacial y por lo menos con una característica clínica mayor (anomalía cardiaca, deficiencia inmunológica, defectos en paladar o retardo en el desarrollo) Métodos: Estudio prospectivo de 39 pacientes captados entre 2012-2015 en el Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social en Guadalajara, México. Los pacientes con características clínicas sugerentes de síndrome velocardiofacial o diagnostico confirmado de tetralogía de Fallot (TOF) o cardiopatía compleja fueron estudiados por bandas G y por hibridación in situ fluorescente (FISH) con una sonda dual TUPLE1(HIRA)/ARSA o TUPLE1(22q11)/22q13(SHANK3), seis pacientes sin la deleción 22q11.2 (seleccionados arbitrariamente) fueron estudiados con la sonda dual DiGeorge II (10p14)/D10Z1. Resultados: Veintidós pacientes (7 hombres y 15 mujeres) tuvieron la deleción 22q11.2 y 17/39 no la tuvieron, ningún paciente tuvo la pérdida de 10p. Entre los 22 pacientes delecionados, 19 tuvieron defecto cardiaco congénito (principalmente TOF). Doce pacientes sin la deleción tuvieron defectos cardiacos congénitos como TOF (4/12), defecto del septo ventricular aislado (2/12) y otros trastornos cardiacos (6/12). Conclusión: En nuestra pequeña muestra, alrededor de ~56% de los pacientes, independientemente de su diagnostico clínico, tuvieron la deleción 22q11.2 esperada. Resaltamos la importancia del diagnóstico citogenético temprano para determinar un apropiado manejo integral para el paciente y sus familiares.

Abstract Introduction: Deletion 22q11.2 occurs in 1:4,000-1:6,000 live births while 10p13p14 deletion is found in 1:200,000 newborns. Both deletions have similar clinical features such as congenital heart disease and immunological anomalies. Objective: We looked for a 22q11.2 deletion in Mexican patients with craniofacial dysmorphisms suggestive of DiGeorge or velocardiofacial syndromes and at least one major phenotypic feature (cardiac anomaly, immune deficiency, palatal defects or development delay). Methods: A prospective study of 39 patients recruited in 2012-2015 at the Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social at Guadalajara, Mexico. The patients with velocardiofacial syndrome-like features or a confirmed tetralogy of Fallot (TOF) or complex cardiopathy were studied by G-banding and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) with a dual TUPLE1(HIRA)/ARSA or TUPLE1(22q11)/22q13(SHANK3) probe, six patients without the 22q11.2 deletion (arbitrarily selected) were tested with the dual DiGeorge II (10p14)/D10Z1 probe. Results: Twenty-two patients (7 males and 15 females) had the 22q11.2 deletion and 17/39 did not have it; no patient had a 10p loss. Among the 22 deleted patients, 19 had congenital heart disease (mostly TOF). Twelve patients without deletion had heart defects such as TOF (4/12), isolate ventricular septal defect (2/12) or other disorders (6/12). Conclusion: In our small sample about ~56% of the patients, regardless of the clinical diagnosis, had the expected 22q11.2 deletion. We remark the importance of early cytogenetic diagnosis in order to achieve a proper integral management of the patients and their families.

Training of postgraduate medical specialty program managers (PMSPM) is essential for the proper development of their programs. Aim: To identify the main training needs of PMSPM at a medical school. Material and Methods: A mixed-methodology approach was implemented including focus group/interviews and the administration of the Program Managers Training Needs Assessment Questionnaire (PROMANAQ) developed by an expert panel with 59 items (with two sections: relevance/performance-self-perception). Higher priority was assigned to items with high relevance and low performance. Results: Forty five PMSPM completed the PROMANAQ (81.8% response rate). Both sections of PROMANAQ were highly reliable (Cronbach alpha of 0.95/0.97 for relevance/performance-self-perception, respectively). The items with higher priority value were evaluation of clinical educators, evaluation of teaching programs and accreditation of programs. Ten PMSPM were included in the focus group (18.2% of the universe). The findings of the qualitative component were concordant with the areas explored in the questionnaire. Conclusions: The PROMANAQ is valid and reliable to identify the training needs of PMSPM. The views of PMSPM must be taken into account for faculty development planning.