Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Pattern of Gross Congenital Malformations in a Tertiary Referral Hospital in Northeast India

  • Original Article
  • Published:
The Indian Journal of Pediatrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To explore the prevalence of structural congenital malformations among newborns and study some of the fetal and maternal characteristics of the malformed babies in North east India where such systematic study on congenital malformation has not been undertaken before.

Methods

A cross sectional study was undertaken from May 2010 through Feb 2013 for estimation of gross congenital malformations among live birth and stillbirth children born in Assam Medical College. All live births were clinically examined for detection of gross congenital malformations and autopsy was carried out on still births and neonates dying within 24 h of birth to detect gross congenital malformations in the internal organs. All malformations were classified as per ICD 10 classification. The mothers of the newborns with congenital malformations were interviewed in a predesigned, pretested proforma. The variables included maternal age, antenatal registration, antenatal history of drug intake, consanguinity and previous history of malformations. Statistical analysis was done using chi square test.

Results

A total 18,192 births including live births and still births were examined and 206 cases of structural malformations were observed. Prevalence of congenital malformations was 1.2 % of the total live births. Distribution of malformation was predominant among males than in females (60.67 vs. 37.37 %; p < 0.05). Musculoskeletal system was the most common system involved. Prevalence of malformation of the cardiovascular system was found to be very low. Malformations among stillbirths and newborns born to unregistered mothers were significantly more. Percentage of malformations in babies born to mothers of more than 30 y of age was higher than other age groups (2.2 %). Occurrence of malformations in low birth weight babies were significantly more (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Prevalence of malformations was 1.2 % of the total live births. Musculoskeletal system was the most common system involved. Congenital malformations were significantly associated with sex of the new born, registration of the mother and birth weight of the newborn.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Czeizel AE. Birth defects are preventable. Int J Med Sci. 2005;2:91–2.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. CDC. Key findings: updated national birth prevalence estimates for selected birth defects in the United States, 2004–2006. Available at www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/birthdefects/features/birthdefects-keyfindings.html. Accessed on 06.06.2014.

  3. WHO. Congenital anomalies. 2014; Fact sheet no. 370. Available at www.who.int/mediacentre/facesheets/fs370/en. Accessed on 6.6.2014.

  4. Parker SE, Mai CT, Canfield MA, Rickard R, Wang Y, Meyer RE, et al. Updated national birth prevalence estimates for selected birth defects in the United States, 2004–2006. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol. 2010;88:1008–16.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Queißer-Luft A, Spranger J. Congenital malformations. Dtsch Arztebl. 2006;103:A2464–71.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Dastgiri S, Stone DH, Le-He C, Gilmore WH. Prevalence and secular trend of congenital anomalies in Glasgow, UK. Arch Dis Child. 2002;86:257–63.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Sridhar K. A community based survey of visible congenital anomalies in rural Tamil Nadu. Indian J Plast Surg. 2009;42:S184–91.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dutta HK, Bhattacharyya NC, Sarma JN, Kusre G. Congenital malformations in Assam. J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg. 2010;15:53–5.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Swain S, Agrawal A, Bhatia BD. Congenital malformations at birth. Indian Pediatr. 1994;31:1187–91.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Singh A, Gupta RK. Pattern of congenital anomalies in newborn: a hospital based prospective study. JK Sci. 2009;11:34–6.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Taksande A, Vilhekar K, Chaturvedi P, Jain M. Congenital malformations at birth in Central India: a rural medical college hospital based data. Indian J Hum Genet. 2010;16:159–63.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. El Koumi MA, Al Banna EA, Lebda I. Pattern of congenital anomalies in newborn: a hospital-based study. Pediatr Rep. 2013;5:e5.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Congenital malformations registry, summary report. New York state department of health center for environmental health bureau of environmental and occupational epidemiology. 2005: Available at https://www.health.ny.gov/diseases/congenital_malformations/2006/section1.htm. Accessed on 20.06.2014.

  14. Congenital anomaly register and information service. Congenital anomaly register & information service for Wales. Caris review 2013. Available at http://www.binocar.org/content/Caris%20review%202013.pdf.

  15. World Health Organization. World atlas of birth defects. 2nd ed. Geneva, Switzerland: International centre for birth defects of the international clearing house for birth defects monitoring systems in collaboration with the Human Genetics Programme of the World Health Organization; 2003.

  16. Kramer MS, Liu S, Luo Z, Yuan H, Platt RW, Joseph KS. Analysis of perinatal mortality and its components: time for a change? Am J Epidemiol. 2002;156:493–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kurinczuk JJ, Hollowell J, Boyd PA, Oakley L, Brocklehurst P, Gray R. Inequalities in infant mortality project briefing paper 4. The contribution of congenital anomalies to infant mortality. Oxford: National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit; 2010. Available at www.npeu.ox.ac.uk/infant-mortality.

  18. Sachdeva S, Nanda S, Bhalla K, Sachdeva R. Gross congenital malformation at birth in a government hospital. Indian J Public Health. 2014;58:54–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. 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.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Chaturvedi P, Banerjee KS. Spectrum of congenital malformations in the newborns from rural Maharashtra. Indian J Pediatr. 1989;56:501–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Agrawal D, Mohanty BB, Sarangi R, Kumar S, Mahapatra SK, Chinara PK. Study of incidence and prevalence of musculoskeletal anomalies in a tertiary care hospital of eastern India. J Clin Diagn Res. 2014;8:AC04–6.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Zhang X, Li S, Wu S, Hao X, Guo S, Suzuki K, et al. Prevalence of birth defects and risk-factor analysis from a population-based survey in Inner Mongolia, China. BMC Pediatr. 2012;12:125.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Golalipour MJ, Marfazeli A, Mobasheri E. Incidence and pattern of congenital malformation in Gorgan-North of Iran. J Med Sci. 2013;13:834–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Mashuda F, Zuechner A, Chalya PL, Kidenya BR, Manyama M. Pattern and factors associated with congenital anomalies among young infants admitted at Bugando medical centre, Mwanza, Tanzania. BMC Res Notes. 2014;7:195.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Indian Council of Medical Research. Reproductive health; Annual report 2002–03. New Delhi: Indian Council of Medical Research; p. 91.

  26. A Eurocat Working Group.15 years of surveillance of congenital anomalies in Europe (1980-1994). EUROCAT REPORT 7. Brussels: Scientific Institute of Public Health - Louis Pasteur (formerly Institute of Hygiene and Epidemiology); 1997. Available at lenus.ie/.../15%20years%20of%20Surveillance%20of%20Congenital%20.... Assessed on 20.07.2014.

  27. Yang JH, Kim YJ, Chung JH, Kim MY, Ryu HM, Ahn HK, et al. A multi-center study for birth defect monitoring systems in Korea. J Korean Med Sci. 2004;19:509–13.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Acharya G, Sitras V, Maltau JM, Dahl LB, Kaaresen PI, Hanssen TA, et al. Major congenital heart disease in northern Norway: shortcomings of pre- and postnatal diagnosis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2004;83:1124–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Directorate General of Health Services, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Govt of India. Indian Public Health Standards (IPHS) 2012 Guidelines for Subcentres.

  30. Godwin KA, Sibbald B, Bedard T, Kuzeljevic B, Lowry RB, Arbour L. Changes in frequencies of select congenital anomalies since the onset of folic acid fortification in a Canadian birth defect registry. Can J Public Health. 2008;99:271–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. March of Dimes. Available at http://www.marchofdimes.com/baby/low-birthweight.aspx. Accessed on 18.06.2014.

  32. Suguna Bai NS, Mascarane M, Syamalan K, Nair PM. An etiological study of congenital malformation in the newborn. Indian Pediatr. 1982;19:1003–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge Puspanjali Tairai and Rama Basfore for their help in collection of data and conducting autopsy.

Contributions

JB: Preparation of manuscript, analysis of data, data collection; GK: Concept design, manuscript preparation, data collection; RB: Data collection, editing the manuscript. GK will act as guarantor for this paper.

Conflict of Interest

None.

Source of Funding

The study was sponsored by Indian Council of Medical Research, Govt of India. Vide file no 54/2/2009 BMS.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Community Medicine, Assam Medical College, Dibrugarh, Assam, India

    Jenita Baruah

  2. Department of Anatomy, Assam Medical College, DQ12, G-Lane, Dibrugarh, 786002, Assam, India

    Giriraj Kusre

  3. Department of Pediatrics, Assam Medical College, Dibrugarh, Assam, India

    Reeta Bora

Authors
  1. Jenita Baruah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Giriraj Kusre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Reeta Bora
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Giriraj Kusre.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Baruah, J., Kusre, G. & Bora, R. Pattern of Gross Congenital Malformations in a Tertiary Referral Hospital in Northeast India. Indian J Pediatr 82, 917–922 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12098-014-1685-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12098-014-1685-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation