BACKGROUND: A birth prevalence of orofacial clefts (OFCs) worldwide has been documented to vary. However a systematic assessment is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To assess the evidence in the literature for the birth prevalence of OFCs. MATERIAL AND METHOD: A systematic literature search was conducted using electronic databases through PubMed between 1950 and June 2015 using key words and search terms of cleft lip palate OR orofacial cleft AND prevalence. RESULTS: There were 45,193 patients with OFCs found in a study population of 30,665,615 live births. According to continents, the OFC birth prevalence (95% confidence interval)from Asia, North America, Europe, Oceania, South America, and Africa were 1.57 (1.54-1.60), 1.56 (1.53-1.59), 1.55 (1.52-1.58), 1.33 (1.30-1.36), 0.99 (0.96-1.02), and 0.57 (0.54-0.60) per 1,000 live births, respectively. The American Indians had the highest prevalence rates of 2.62 per 1,000 live births, followed by the Japanese, the Chinese, and the Whites of 1.73, 1.56, and 1.55 per 1,000 live births, respectively. The Blacks had the lowest rate of 0.58 per 1,000 live births. CONCLUSION: Observed differences may also be of ethnic origin, genetic, environmental factors, and methods of ascertainment. Further investigations are needed to manage this global health problem.
BACKGROUND: A birth prevalence of orofacial clefts (OFCs) worldwide has been documented to vary. However a systematic assessment is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To assess the evidence in the literature for the birth prevalence of OFCs. MATERIAL AND METHOD: A systematic literature search was conducted using electronic databases through PubMed between 1950 and June 2015 using key words and search terms of cleft lip palate OR orofacial cleft AND prevalence. RESULTS: There were 45,193 patients with OFCs found in a study population of 30,665,615 live births. According to continents, the OFC birth prevalence (95% confidence interval)from Asia, North America, Europe, Oceania, South America, and Africa were 1.57 (1.54-1.60), 1.56 (1.53-1.59), 1.55 (1.52-1.58), 1.33 (1.30-1.36), 0.99 (0.96-1.02), and 0.57 (0.54-0.60) per 1,000 live births, respectively. The American Indians had the highest prevalence rates of 2.62 per 1,000 live births, followed by the Japanese, the Chinese, and the Whites of 1.73, 1.56, and 1.55 per 1,000 live births, respectively. The Blacks had the lowest rate of 0.58 per 1,000 live births. CONCLUSION: Observed differences may also be of ethnic origin, genetic, environmental factors, and methods of ascertainment. Further investigations are needed to manage this global health problem.
Authors: Hua Tian; Jifan Feng; Jingyuan Li; Thach-Vu Ho; Yuan Yuan; Yang Liu; Frederick Brindopke; Jane C Figueiredo; William Magee; Pedro A Sanchez-Lara; Yang Chai Journal: Hum Mol Genet Date: 2017-03-01 Impact factor: 6.150
Authors: Willian Saranholi da Silva; Ana Lúcia Pompéia Fraga de Almeida; Maria Giulia Rezende Pucciarelli; Karin Hermana Neppelenbroek; Juliana Dreyer da Silva de Menezes; Renato Yassutaka Faria Yaedú; Thais Marchini Oliveira; Flavia M R N Cintra; Simone Soares Journal: Odontology Date: 2018-03-01 Impact factor: 2.634
Authors: Priya Nandoskar; Patrick Coghlan; Mark H Moore; Joao Ximenes; Eileen M Moore; Jonathan Karnon; David A Watters Journal: World J Surg Date: 2020-06 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Paul Wolujewicz; John W Steele; Julia A Kaltschmidt; Richard H Finnell; Margaret Elizabeth Ross Journal: Genesis Date: 2021-10-29 Impact factor: 2.487
Authors: Cynthia J Wolf; David G Belair; Carrie M Becker; Kaberi P Das; Judith E Schmid; Barbara D Abbott Journal: Birth Defects Res Date: 2018-10-22 Impact factor: 2.344