Though these findings are a large step in determining the underlying cause of FHS and widely accepted, others would claim molecular diagnosis is not always successful and the mutation is not a mandatory feature for the diagnosis of FHS. Diagnosis
Until recently, doctors have diagnosed patients with FHS based on clinical observations and how well they fit the disease description, usually occurring in early childhood. Molecular genetic testing is also used now to test for genetic mutations. By performing a sequence analysis test of select exons, mutations can be detected in exon 34 of the SRCAP gene. This mutation has been observed in 19 patients to date. In most cases, if the patient shows classic facial features of FHS, the molecular testing will show a mutation on the SRCAP gene. Differential diagnosis
FHS shares some common features with Rubinstein–Taybi (due to overlapping effects of mutations on SRCAP), however cranial and hand anomalies are distinctive: broad thumbs, narrow palate, and microcephaly are absent in Floating-Harbor Syndrome. One child in the UK has a diagnosis of microcephaly alongside Floating–Harbor syndrome. Management
There are no cures for FHS. Close monitoring of growth in the first few years is essential, as well as annual general health screening and tests listed below. An FHS diagnosis will affect the individual and those there to support them.Managing symptoms and features of FHS involves maintaining a close watch on the patients physical as well as mental health.
Similarly, fungus can be seen under a microscope or found on a culture. Some viral infections may cause a rash with boils on a reddish base. Rashes caused by herpes simplex virus and varicella zoster virus in particular may be confused with erythema toxicum neonatorum. These viruses are diagnosed by scraping the base of a lesion. Multinucleated giant cells can be seen under a microscope. Some of these tests may be ordered if the diagnosis is unclear. Treatment
Erythema toxicum neonatorum resolves without treatment, typically within one or two weeks. There are no associated systemic symptoms or long-term consequences of the rash. History
The rash of erythema toxicum neonatorum has been described by doctors for centuries. Ancient Mesopotamians believed that it represented a cleansing mechanism against the mothers blood. Later physicians believed that it was caused by the skins response to meconium. The name erythema toxicum neonatorum was first used by Dr. Karl Leiner in 1912 because he believed that the rash was caused by enterotoxins. Although Leiners hypothesis was incorrect and the rash is not actually caused by toxins, the medical community continues to call the rash erythema toxicum neonatorum. References


== External links ==