CHARGE (Coloboma of the eye, Heart defects, Atresia of the choanae, Retardation of growth and/or development, Genital hypoplasia, Ear anomalies including hearing loss) syndrome is a rare syndrome with an incidence of approximately 1:15,000 newborns. It is caused by pathogenic variants in the CHD7 gene and clinically characterized by a wide range of anomalies with variable expression. Growth retardation affects 60–72% of children with CHARGE syndrome, making it one of the most prominent medical issues in the syndrome. Growth retardation in CHARGE syndrome is thought to be multifactorial and can be influenced by almost all co-morbidities, requiring a multidisciplinary approach to the different medical problems. In this systematic review, we describe what is currently known about growth in CHARGE syndrome and how it is influenced by commonly seen clinical problems including feeding difficulties, hypogonadotropic hypogonadism and growth hormone deficiency. Furthermore, we provide recommendations for a multidisciplinary approach.

Background Growth retardation is one of the main hallmarks of CHARGE syndrome (CS), yet little is known about the body proportions of these children. Knowledge of body proportions in CS may contribute to a better characterization of this syndrome. This knowledge is important when considering starting growth‐stimulating therapy. Methods For this cross‐sectional study, we selected 32 children with CS and a CHD7 mutation at the Dutch CHARGE Family Day in 2016 or 2017 and the International CHARGE conference in Orlando, Florida, in 2017. We used photogrammetric anthropometry—a measurement method based on digital photographs—to determine various body proportions. We compared these to measurements in 21 normally proportioned children with growth hormone deficiency, using independent‐samples t test, Mann–Whitney U test, or chi‐square test as appropriate. Results Children with CS appear to have a shorter trunk in proportion to their height, head length, and arm length. Children with CS also had smaller feet proportional to tibia length compared to controls. The change of body proportions with age was similar in children with CS and controls. Conclusion Body proportions in children with CS are significantly different from those of normally proportioned controls, but a similar change of body proportions with age was noted for both groups.