“…Overall, in this series of 352 patients, 138 pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants were identified, among which 26 CNVs, and 22 variants of uncertain significance. Our approach revealed to be a useful strategy, providing a molecular diagnosis in 35.2% of patients, similar to other heterogeneous conditions (50% for inborn errors of metabolism (Yubero et al, ), 47.3% for myopathies and muscular dystrophies (Stehlikova et al, ), 39% for intellectual disability (Martinez et al, ), 28.5% for epileptic encephalopathy (Kothur et al, ), 28.1% for disorders of sexual development (Fan et al, ), 24.5% for developmental eye disorders (Patel et al, ), 20% for primary arrhythmia syndrome and cardiomyopathy (Robyns et al, ), and 18% for inherited polyneuropathy (Wang et al, ). A 7.7% increase was observed in our diagnostic performance, compared to our previous workflow (diagnostic yield 27.5% before 2014, data not shown).…”