Volume : 10, Issue : 04, April – 2023

Title:

15.A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW ON CONGENITAL ANOMALIES
‬

Authors :

Mangesh Z. Sangle, Mr. Pramod M. Bhosale

Abstract :

Congenital anomalies are a major cause of stillbirths and neonatal mortality. The pattern and prevalence of congenital anomalies may vary over time or with geographical location. In addition to examining maternal and perinatal risk factors, the goal of this study is to ascertain the prevalence and kinds of congenital abnormalities in live babies. Depending on the exact birth defect, birth defects can be detected either during pregnancy or after the infant is delivered. Neural tube defects (NTDs), including spina bifida and anencephaly, are severe birth defects of the central nervous system that originate during embryonic development when the neural tube fails to close completely. The causes of human NTDs are multifaceted and include both genetic and environmental elements. Several nongenetic risk factors have been identified as having potential for protection by maternal folic acid supplementation, despite the fact that the genetic foundation is still poorly understood.
KEYWORD’S: Congenital Anomaly, Diagnosis of Birth Defects, Neural Tube Defect, Treatment of NTD’s,

Cite This Article:

Please cite this article in press Mangesh Zanakrao Sangle et al, A Systematic Review On Congenital Anomalies., Indo Am. J. P. Sci, 2023; 10 (04).

Number of Downloads : 10

References:

1. M. DeSilva et al. /Vaccine 34 (2016) 6015-6026. 0264-410X/© 2016 Published by Elsevier Ltd. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.03.047.
2. Congenital anomalies [website]. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2016 (http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs370/en/index.html , accessed 12 February 2020).
3. Resolution WHA63.17. Birth defects. In: Sixty-third World Health Assembly, Geneva, 17–21 May 2010. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010
4. N Spinder, J R Prins, J E H Bergman, N Smidt, H Kromhout, H M Boezen, H E K de Walle, Congenital anomalies in the offspring of occupationally exposed mothers: a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies using expert assessment for occupational exposures, Human Reproduction, Volume 34, Issue 5, May 2019, Pages 903–919, https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dez033.
5. Sarkar S, Patra C, Dasgupta MK, Nayek K, Karmakar PR. Prevalence of congenital anomalies in neonates and associated risk factors in a tertiary care hospital in eastern India. J Clin Neonatol 2013;2:131-4
6. Bhide P, Gund P, Kar A (2016) Prevalence of Congenital Anomalies in an Indian Maternal Cohort: Healthcare, Prevention, and Surveillance Implications. PLoS ONE 11(11): e0166408. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.016640
7. Abebe S, Gebru G, Amenu D, Mekonnen Z, Dube L (2021). Risk factors associated with congenital anomalies among newborns in southwestern Ethiopia: A case-control study. PLoS ONE 16(1): e0245915. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245915.
8. Marcia L Feldkamp, John C Carey, Janice L B Byrne,Sergey Krikov, Lorenzo D Botto (2017). An overview on Etiology and clinical presentation of birth defects: population based study. the bmj | BMJ 2017;357:j2249 | doi: 10.1136/bmj.j2249.
9. Thacker SB, Berkelman RL. History of public health surveillance. In: Halperin W, Baker EL, editors. Public health surveillance. New York: Van Norstrand Reinhold; 1992:1–15.
10. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Updated guidelines for evaluating public health surveillance systems: recommendations from the Guidelines Working Group. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2001;50(RR-13):1–30 (http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5013a1.htm, accessed 12 February 2020).
11. Surveillance of antiretroviral drug toxicity in pregnancy and breastfeeding. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2013 (http://www.who.int/hiv/pub/arv_toxicity/technical-brief-maternal/en/index.html , accessed 12 February 2020).
12. Massachusetts Birth Defects Surveillance Reports. Massachusetts Birth Defects Monitoring Program reports and fact sheets [online database]. Boston: Commonwealth of Massachusetts; 2020 (https://www.mass.gov/lists/massachusettsbirth-defects-surveillance-reports , accessed 12 February 2020).
13. Bower C, Rudy E, Callaghan A, Quick J, Nassar N. Age at diagnosis of birth defects. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol. 2010;88(4):251–5. doi:10.1002/bdra.20658.
14. Sever LE, editor. Guidelines for conducting birth defects surveillance. Atlanta: National Birth Defects Prevention Network, Inc.; 2001.
15. Leite IC, Koifman S. Oral clefts, consanguinity, parental tobacco and alcohol use: a case-control study in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Braz Oral Res. 2009;23(1):31–7. doi:10.1590/s1806-83242009000100006. 16. Khalid Y, Ghina M, Fadi B, Fadi C, May K, Joseph R, et al. Consanguineous marriage and congenital heart defects: a casecontrol study in the neonatal period. Am J Med Genet A. 2006;140(14):1524–30. doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.31309.
16. Nabulsi MM, Tamim H, Sabbagh M, Obeid MY, Yunis KA, Bitar FF. Parental consanguinity and congenital heart malformations in a developing country. Am J Med Genet A. 2003;116A(4):342–7. doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.10020.
17. Ramegowda S, Ramachandra NB. Parental consanguinity increases congenital heart diseases in South India. Ann Hum Biol. 2006;33(5–6):519–28. doi:10.1080/03014460600909349.
18. Ravichandran K, Shoukri M, Aljohar A, Shazia NS, Al-Twaijri Y, Al Jarba I. Consanguinity and occurrence of cleft lip/palate: a hospital-based registry study in Riyadh. Am J Med Genet A. 2012;158A(3):541–6. doi:10.1002/ ajmg.a.34432.
19. Rittler M, Liascovich R, Lopez-Camelo J, Castilla EE. Parental consanguinity in specific types of congenital anomalies. Am J Med Genet A. 2001;102A(1):36–43. doi:10.1002/1096-8628(20010722)102:13.0.co;2-m.
20. Sharon W. Gould, MD, T. Ernesto Figueroa, MD, FAAP, FACS, Bradley W. Robinson, MD, FAAP, FACC, and Kirk W. Reichard, MD, MBA, FACS, FAAP. Recent Advances in the Prenatal Diagnosis and Subsequent Management of Congential Anomalies. Published in The Journal of Lancaster General Hospital • Spring 2011 • Vol. 6 – No. 1.
21. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2020). Congenital Anomalies Definitions & Types. https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/birthdefects/index.html
22. Greene ND, Copp AJ. Neural tube defects. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2014;37:221-42. doi: 10.1146/annurev-neuro-062012-170354. PMID: 25032496; PMCID: PMC4486472.
23. Zaganjor, Ibrahim; Sekkarie, Ahlia; Tsang, Becky L.; Williams, Jennifer; Razzaghi, Hilda; Mulinare, Joseph; Sniezek, Joseph E.; Cannon, Michael J.; Rosenthal, Jorge (2016-04-11). “Describing the Prevalence of Neural Tube Defects Worldwide: A Systematic Literature Review” (https://ww w.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4827
24. PLOS ONE. 11 (4): e0151586. Bibcode:2016PLoSO..1151586Z
(https://ui. adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016PLoSO..1151 586Z) .
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0151586 (https://doi.org/10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0 151586).ISSN 1932-6203 (https://www.w orldcat.org/issn/1932-6203) .
PMC 4827875 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.g ov/pmc/articles/PMC4827875) .
PMID 27064786 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm. nih.gov/27064786) .
25. Frey, Lauren; Hauser, W. Allen (2003). “Epidemiology of Neural Tube Defects” (http s://doi.org/10.1046%2Fj.1528-1157.44.s3. 2.x) . Epilepsia. 44 (s3): 4–13. doi:10.1046/j.1528-1157.44.s3.2.x (https:// doi.org/10.1046%2Fj.1528-1157.44.s3.2. x) . ISSN 1528-1167 (https://www.worldcat. org/issn/1528-1167) . PMID 12790881 (htt ps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12790881).
26. National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke. (n.d.). Spina bifida information page. Retrieved February 23, 2017, from https://www.ninds.nih.gov/Disorders/All-Disorders/SpinaBifida-Information-Page (https://www.ninds.nih.gov/Disorders/All-Disorders/Spina-BifidaInformation-Page)
27. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2015). Birth defects: Facts about anencephaly. Retrieved February 23, 2017
28. Prevention of neural tube defects: results of the Medical Research Council Vitamin Study. MRC Vitamin Study Research Group. Lancet 1991;338(8760):131-7.
29. Wald NJ, Law MR, Morris JK, Wald DS. Quantifying the effect of folic acid. Lancet 2001;358(9298):2069-73.