Cara T Mai1, Jennifer L Isenburg1, Mark A Canfield2, Robert E Meyer3,4, Adolfo Correa5, Clinton J Alverson1, Philip J Lupo6, Tiffany Riehle-Colarusso1, Sook Ja Cho7, Deepa Aggarwal8, Russell S Kirby9. 1. Division of Congenital and Developmental Disorders, National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia. 2. Birth Defects Epidemiology and Surveillance Branch, Texas Department of State Health Services, Austin, Texas. 3. North Carolina Birth Defects Monitoring Program, State Center for Health Statistics, Raleigh, North Carolina. 4. Department of Maternal and Child Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 5. University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, Mississippi. 6. Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas. 7. Birth Defects Monitoring & Analysis Unit, Minnesota Department of Health, St. Paul, Minnesota. 8. California Birth Defects Monitoring Program, California Department of Public Health, Richmond, California. 9. Department of Community and Family Health, College of Public Health, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Using the National Birth Defects Prevention Network (NBDPN) annual data report, U.S. national prevalence estimates for major birth defects are developed based on birth cohort 2010-2014. METHODS: Data from 39 U.S. population-based birth defects surveillance programs (16 active case-finding, 10 passive case-finding with case confirmation, and 13 passive without case confirmation) were used to calculate pooled prevalence estimates for major defects by case-finding approach. Fourteen active case-finding programs including at least live birth and stillbirth pregnancy outcomes monitoring approximately one million births annually were used to develop national prevalence estimates, adjusted for maternal race/ethnicity (for all conditions examined) and maternal age (trisomies and gastroschisis). These calculations used a similar methodology to the previous estimates to examine changes over time. RESULTS: The adjusted national birth prevalence estimates per 10,000 live births ranged from 0.62 for interrupted aortic arch to 16.87 for clubfoot, and 19.93 for the 12 critical congenital heart defects combined. While the birth prevalence of most birth defects studied remained relatively stable over 15 years, an increasing prevalence was observed for gastroschisis and Down syndrome. Additionally, the prevalence for atrioventricular septal defect, tetralogy of Fallot, omphalocele, and trisomy 18 increased in this period compared to the previous periods. Active case-finding programs generally had higher prevalence rates for most defects examined, most notably for anencephaly, anophthalmia/microphthalmia, trisomy 13, and trisomy 18. CONCLUSION: National estimates of birth defects prevalence provide data for monitoring trends and understanding the impact of these conditions. Increasing prevalence rates observed for selected conditions warrant further examination.
BACKGROUND: Using the National Birth Defects Prevention Network (NBDPN) annual data report, U.S. national prevalence estimates for major birth defects are developed based on birth cohort 2010-2014. METHODS: Data from 39 U.S. population-based birth defects surveillance programs (16 active case-finding, 10 passive case-finding with case confirmation, and 13 passive without case confirmation) were used to calculate pooled prevalence estimates for major defects by case-finding approach. Fourteen active case-finding programs including at least live birth and stillbirth pregnancy outcomes monitoring approximately one million births annually were used to develop national prevalence estimates, adjusted for maternal race/ethnicity (for all conditions examined) and maternal age (trisomies and gastroschisis). These calculations used a similar methodology to the previous estimates to examine changes over time. RESULTS: The adjusted national birth prevalence estimates per 10,000 live births ranged from 0.62 for interrupted aortic arch to 16.87 for clubfoot, and 19.93 for the 12 critical congenital heart defects combined. While the birth prevalence of most birth defects studied remained relatively stable over 15 years, an increasing prevalence was observed for gastroschisis and Down syndrome. Additionally, the prevalence for atrioventricular septal defect, tetralogy of Fallot, omphalocele, and trisomy 18 increased in this period compared to the previous periods. Active case-finding programs generally had higher prevalence rates for most defects examined, most notably for anencephaly, anophthalmia/microphthalmia, trisomy 13, and trisomy 18. CONCLUSION: National estimates of birth defects prevalence provide data for monitoring trends and understanding the impact of these conditions. Increasing prevalence rates observed for selected conditions warrant further examination.
Authors: Cara T Mai; Russell S Kirby; Adolfo Correa; Deborah Rosenberg; Michael Petros; Michael C Fagen Journal: J Public Health Manag Pract Date: 2016 May-Jun
Authors: Mark A Canfield; Margaret A Honein; Nataliya Yuskiv; Jian Xing; Cara T Mai; Julianne S Collins; Owen Devine; Joann Petrini; Tunu A Ramadhani; Charlotte A Hobbs; Russell S Kirby Journal: Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol Date: 2006-11
Authors: Samantha E Parker; Cara T Mai; Matthew J Strickland; Richard S Olney; Russel Rickard; Lisa Marengo; Ying Wang; S Shahrukh Hashmi; Robert E Meyer Journal: Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol Date: 2009-11
Authors: Mark A Canfield; Cara T Mai; Ying Wang; Alissa O'Halloran; Lisa K Marengo; Richard S Olney; Christopher L Borger; Rachel Rutkowski; Jane Fornoff; Nila Irwin; Glenn Copeland; Timothy J Flood; Robert E Meyer; Russel Rickard; C J Alverson; Joseph Sweatlock; Russell S Kirby Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2014-07-17 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Mark D Reller; Matthew J Strickland; Tiffany Riehle-Colarusso; William T Mahle; Adolfo Correa Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2008-07-26 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: Jennifer Williams; Cara T Mai; Joe Mulinare; Jennifer Isenburg; Timothy J Flood; Mary Ethen; Barbara Frohnert; Russell S Kirby Journal: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep Date: 2015-01-16 Impact factor: 17.586
Authors: Annelise C Arth; Sarah C Tinker; Regina M Simeone; Elizabeth C Ailes; Janet D Cragan; Scott D Grosse Journal: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep Date: 2017-01-20 Impact factor: 17.586
Authors: Marlene Anderka; Cara T Mai; Paul A Romitti; Glenn Copeland; Jennifer Isenburg; Marcia L Feldkamp; Sergey Krikov; Russel Rickard; Richard S Olney; Mark A Canfield; Carol Stanton; Bridget Mosley; Russell S Kirby Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2015-09-19 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: S L Son; A A Allshouse; J M Page; M P Debbink; H Pinar; U Reddy; K J Gibbins; B J Stoll; C B Parker; D J Dudley; M W Varner; R M Silver Journal: BJOG Date: 2020-10-14 Impact factor: 6.531
Authors: Hyuk Jin Yun; Juan David Ruiz Perez; Patricia Sosa; J Alejandro Valdés; Neel Madan; Rie Kitano; Shizuko Akiyama; Brian G Skotko; Henry A Feldman; Diana W Bianchi; P Ellen Grant; Tomo Tarui; Kiho Im Journal: Cereb Cortex Date: 2021-01-05 Impact factor: 5.357
Authors: Julia L Finkelstein; Amy Fothergill; Christina B Johnson; Heather M Guetterman; Beena Bose; Shameem Jabbar; Mindy Zhang; Christine M Pfeiffer; Yan Ping Qi; Charles E Rose; Jennifer L Williams; Wesley Bonam; Krista S Crider Journal: Curr Dev Nutr Date: 2021-04-26
Authors: Vincenzo G Nocera; Aaron P Wood; Angela J Wozencroft; Dawn P Coe Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-05-18 Impact factor: 3.390