Magnitude, risk factors and immediate outcome of external congenital anomalies in neonates in government Cuddalore medical college and hospital: an observational study

R. Ramanathan; M. Mahalakshmi

doi:10.18203/2349-3291.ijcp20240087

Authors

R. Ramanathan Department of Paediatrics, Government Cuddalore Medical College and Hospital, Chidambaram, Tamil Nadu, India
M. Mahalakshmi Department of Paediatrics, Government Cuddalore Medical College and Hospital, Chidambaram, Tamil Nadu, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2349-3291.ijcp20240087

Keywords:

External congenital anomalies, Magnitude, Risk factors, Outcome

Abstract

Background: Despite the enormous incidence of congenital malformations in developing countries, there are presently few thorough data on these disorders because there are no birth defect registries. This study was conducted with objectives to determine the magnitude, risk factors and outcomes of external congenital anomalies in neonates born in government Cuddalore medical college and hospital.

Methods: The present study is an observational study. All the neonates born during the study period were included in our study and risk factors and outcome of 201 babies born with external congenital anomalies were analyzed in detail.

Results: The incidence of external congenital anomalies is 5.68% with 33% having major and 63% having minor anomalies. Among the major anomalies cleft lip and/or palate is the most common anomaly (5%) in our study. Overall sacral dimple is the most commonly observed external congenital anomaly (9.50%). Four-fifths of the newborns with external congenital anomalies were discharged. About 13% of the newborns with congenital anomalies expired.

Conclusions: A comprehensive package that includes preventive services, diagnostic, surgical or medical intervention, financial assistance, counselling, and psychosocial support, as well as follow-up treatments like rehabilitation, is required in combating the incidence of congenital anomalies.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Ndibazza J, Lule S, Nampijja M, Mpairwe H, Oduru G, Kiggundu M et al. A description of congenital anomalies among infants in Entebbe, Uganda. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol. 2011;91(9):857-61.

Oestergaard MZ, Inoue M, Yoshida S, Mahanani WR, Gore FM, Cousens S et al. Neonatal mortality levels for 193 countries in 2009 with trends since 1990: a systematic analysis of Progress, projections, and priorities. PLoS Med. 2011;8:e1001080.

Kumar P. Dysmorphology. In: Kumar P, Burton B, editors. Congenital malformations. 1st edition. Blacklick. USA: McGraw-Hill Professional Publishing. 2008;3-11.

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(3):131.

Egbe A, Uppu S, Lee S, Stroustrup A, Ho D, Srivastava S. Congenital malformations in the newborn population: a population study and analysis of the effect of sex and prematurity. Pediatr Neonatol. 2015;56(1):25-30.

Obu HA, Chinawa JM, Uleanya ND, Adimora GN, Obi IE. Congenital malformations among newborns admitted in the neonatal unit of a tertiary hospital in Enugu, south-East Nigeria-a retrospective study. BMC Res Notes. 2012;5:177.

Chen B-Y, Hwang B-F, Guo Y-L. Epidemiology of congenital anomalies in a population-based Birth registry in Taiwan, 2002. J Formos Med Assoc. 2009;108(6):460-68.

Francine R, Pascale S, Aline H. Congenital anomalies: prevalence and risk factors. Univers J Public Health. 2014;2(2):58-63.

Sachdeva S, Nanda S, Bhalla K, Sachdeva R. Gross congenital malformation at birth in a government hospital. Indian J Public Health. 2014;58(1):54-6.

Macintosh MC, Fleming KM, Bailey JA, Doyle P, Modder J, Acolet D et al. Perinatal mortality and congenital anomalies in babies of women with type 1 or type 2 diabetes in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland: population-based study. BMJ. 2006;333(7560):177.

Sinha A, Tripathi S, Nigam N, Kumar M, Singh SN. Profile of neonates born with congenital birth defects in a tertiary care hospital of North India: An observational study. Clin Epidemiol Glob Heal. 2022;14:100999.

Anane-Fenin B, Opoku DA, Chauke L. Prevalence, Pattern, and Outcome of Congenital Anomalies Admitted to a Neonatal Unit in a Low-Income Country-a Ten-Year Retrospective Study. Matern Child Health J. 2023;27(5):837-49.

Bhide P, Gund P, Kar A. Prevalence of Congenital Anomalies in an Indian Maternal Cohort: Healthcare, Prevention, and Surveillance Implications. PLoS One. 2016;11(11):e0166408.

Taye M, Afework M, Fantaye W, Diro E, Worku A. Magnitude of Birth Defects in Central and Northwest Ethiopia from 2010-2014: A Descriptive Retrospective Study. PLoS one. 2016;11(10):e0161998.

Patel KG, Chaudhary C. Study of congenital malformations in newborns: a hospital-based prospective study. Int J Contemp Pediatr. 2017;4(4):1409-3.

Padmanabhan R, Venkatasubramanian R, Heber A. Prevalence and pattern of congenital malformations among neonates in a medical college hospital-a retrospective study. Int J Scient Study. 2019;6(12):28-31.

Marwah A. Profile of gross congenital malformations among live newborns and its associated risk factors from a tertiary care rural teaching institute. Asian J Biomed Pharmaceutical Sci. 2016;6(55):16.

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(3):131.

Doddabasappa PN, Adarsh E, Divya N. Prevalence of congenital anomalies: a hospital-based study. Int J Contemp Pediatr. 2018;5:119-23.