Advertisement

Clinical Research in Cardiology

, Volume 100, Issue 12, pp 1111–1117 | Cite as

Frequency and spectrum of congenital heart defects among live births in Germany

A study of the competence network for congenital heart defects
  • Gerda Schwedler
  • Angelika Lindinger
  • Peter E. Lange
  • Ulrich Sax
  • Julianna Olchvary
  • Brigitte Peters
  • Ulrike Bauer
  • Hans-Werner Hense
Original Paper

Abstract

Background

Congenital heart defects (CHD) are the most common single organ malformations in humans. A comprehensive study was initiated within the Competence Network for Congenital Heart Defects to assess population-based nationwide prevalence data for Germany.

Methods

Study register of demographic and medical data of live births with CHD born between July 2006 and June 2007.

Results

Seven thousand two hundred forty-five live births and infants with CHD were registered in Germany by 260 participating institutions (prevalence 107.6 per 10,000 live births). The most common lesions were ventricular septal defect, atrial septal defect and valvular pulmonary stenosis with 52.7, 18.3 and 6.6 per 10,000 live births, respectively. A single ventricle, tetralogy of Fallot and the complete transposition of the great arteries were the most common severe cardiac lesions (3.0, 2.7 and 2.3 per 10,000 live births). Parents reported that prenatal echocardiography had been performed in 53.8% of severe CHD cases with a cardiac defect detected in 77.5% of them.

Conclusion

The reported prevalences of severe CHD are within the range of regional and European comparative data. The prenatal detection rate of severe cardiovascular malformations is comparable to contemporary European registries. Postnatal diagnosis of the CHD has been made early in life.

Keywords

Congenital heart defects Prevalence Live births Competence network for congenital heart defects 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to express our thanks to all cooperating paediatric cardiology institutions. They are cited in the “Supporting Information” [9]. We would like to thank J. Frei, A.-M. Körten, S. Pöpke, M. Frey, H. Brames and A. Meyer-Rapp for their support in data collection and management. The project was supported by the Competence Network for Congenital Heart Defects, under the sponsorship of the Federal Ministry for Education and Research (FKZ 01GI0601).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Mitchell SC, Korones SB, Berendes HW (1971) Congenital heart disease in 56,109 births. Incidence and natural history. Circulation 43:323–332PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lechat MF, Dolk H (1993) Registries of congenital anomalies: EUROCAT. Environ Health Perspect 101(Suppl 2):153–157PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dastgiri S, Stone DH, Le-Ha C, Gilmour WH (2002) Prevalence and secular trend of congenital anomalies in Glasgow, UK. Arch Dis Child 86:257–263PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schoetzau A, van Santen F, Sauer U, Irl C (1997) Kardiovaskuläre Fehlbildungen in Bayern 1984-1991. Z Kardiol 86:496–504Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Queißer-Luft A, Spranger J (2006) Fehlbildungen bei Neugeborenen. Dtsch Arztebl 103:2464–2471Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rösch C, Steinbicker V (2002) Das Fehlbildungsmonitoring Sachsen-Anhalt: Vorstellung des ersten Jahresberichtes zu Fehlbildungen bei Neugeborenen im gesamten Bundesland. Ärzteblatt Sachsen-Anhalt 13:18–24Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lange PE (2006) Vernetzung hilft, Forschungs- und Versorgungsdefizite zu beseitigen. MedWelt 57:122Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bauer U, Niggemeyer E, Lange PE (2006) The competence network for congenital heart defects. Networking instead of isolated efforts for optimized research and care. Med Klin 101:753–758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lindinger A, Schwedler G, Hense HW (2010) Prevalence of congenital heart defects in newborns in Germany: results of the first registration year of the PAN study (July 2006 to June 2007). Klin Padiatr 222:321–330PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Reng C-M, Debold P, Specker C, Pommerening K (2006) Generische Lösungen zum Datenschutz für die Forschungsnetze in der Medizin. Medizinische Wissenschaftliche VerlagsgesellschaftGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Helbing K, Demiroglu SY, Rakebrandt F, Pommerening K, Rienhoff O, Sax U (2010) A data protection scheme for medical research networks. Review after five years of operation. Method Inf Med 49: Epub ahead of printGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Committee of the Association for European Paediatric Cardiology (2002) The European Paediatric Cardiac Code: the first revision. Cardiol Young 12:1–211Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    EUROCATWebsiteDatabase. http://www.eurocat-network.eu/ACCESSPREVALENCEDATA/PrevalenceTables. Data uploaded 14 April 2010, accessed 30 June 2010
  14. 14.
    Dilber D, Malcic I (2010) Spectrum of congenital heart defects in Croatia. Eur J Pediatr 169:543–550PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Moons P, Sluysmans T, De Wolf D, Massin M, Suys B, Benatar A, Gewillig M (2009) Congenital heart disease in 111 225 births in Belgium: birth prevalence, treatment and survival in the 21st century. Acta Paediatr 98:472–477PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Steinbicker V, Rösch C (1998) Monitoringsystem angeborener Herzfehler. PerinatalMedizin 10:45–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pötzsch S, Hoyer-Schuschke J, Köhn A, Vogt C, Götz D, Loderstedt M (2009) Jahresbericht des Bundeslandes Sachsen-Anhalt zur Häufigkeit von congenitalen Fehlbildungen und Anomalien sowie genetisch bedingten Erkrankungen 2008. Fehlbildungsmonitoring Sachsen-Anhalt an der Medizinischen Fakultät der Otto-von-Guericke Universität MagdeburgGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hoffman JI, Kaplan S (2002) The incidence of congenital heart disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 39:1890–1900PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Oyen N, Poulsen G, Boyd HA, Wohlfahrt J, Jensen PK, Melbye M (2009) National time trends in congenital heart defects, Denmark, 1977–2005. Am Heart J 157:467–473PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Khoshnood B, De Vigan C, Vodovar V, Goujard J, Lhomme A, Bonnet D, Goffinet F (2005) Trends in prenatal diagnosis, pregnancy termination, and perinatal mortality of newborns with congenital heart disease in France, 1983–2000: a population-based evaluation. Pediatrics 115:95–101PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Garne E, Stoll C, Clementi M (2001) Evaluation of prenatal diagnosis of congenital heart diseases by ultrasound: experience from 20 European registries. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 17:386–391PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Grandjean H, Larroque D, Levi S (1999) The performance of routine ultrasonographic screening of pregnancies in the Eurofetus Study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 181:446–454PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Germanakis I, Sifakis S (2006) The impact of fetal echocardiography on the prevalence of liveborn congenital heart disease. Pediatr Cardiol 27:465–472PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gerda Schwedler
    • 1
  • Angelika Lindinger
    • 2
  • Peter E. Lange
    • 1
  • Ulrich Sax
    • 3
  • Julianna Olchvary
    • 2
  • Brigitte Peters
    • 4
  • Ulrike Bauer
    • 1
  • Hans-Werner Hense
    • 5
  1. 1.Deutsches Herzzentrum Berlin—Kompetenznetz Angeborene HerzfehlerBerlinGermany
  2. 2.Klinik fürPädiatrische KardiologieUniversitätsklinikum des SaarlandesHomburg/SaarGermany
  3. 3.Medical Informatics and Information TechnologyUniversity Medical Center GoettingenGöttingenGermany
  4. 4.Institut für Biometrie und Medizinische InformatikOtto-von-Guericke-Universität MagdeburgMagdeburgGermany
  5. 5.Bereich Klinische Epidemiologie, Institut für Epidemiologie und SozialmedizinUniversität MünsterMünsterGermany

Personalised recommendations