Search

Objective Bladder exstrophy (BE) is a rare but severe birth defect affecting the lower abdominal wall and genitourinary system. The objective of the study is to examine the total prevalence, trends in prevalence, and age-specific mortality among individuals with BE. Study Design We conducted a retrospective cohort study. Data were analyzed from 20 birth defects surveillance programs, members of the International Clearinghouse for Birth Defects Surveillance and Research in 16 countries. Live births, stillbirths, and elective terminations of pregnancy for fetal anomaly (ETOPFA) diagnosed with BE from 1974 to 2014. Pooled and program-specific prevalence of BE per 100,000 total births was calculated. The 95% confidence intervals (CI) for prevalence were estimated using Poisson approximation of binomial distribution. Time trends in prevalence of BE from 2000 to 2014 were examined using Poisson regression. Proportion of deaths among BE cases was calculated on the day of birth, day 2 to 6, day 7 to 27, day 28 to 364, 1 to 4 years, and ≥5 years. Mortality analysis was stratified by isolated, multiple, and syndromic case status. Results The pooled total prevalence of BE was 2.58 per 100,000 total births (95% CI = 2.40, 2.78) for study years 1974 to 2014. Prevalence varied over time with a decreasing trend from 2000 to 2014. The first-week mortality proportion was 3.5, 17.3, and 14.6% among isolated, multiple, and syndromic BE cases, respectively. The majority of first-week mortality occurred on the first day of life among isolated, multiple, and syndromic BE cases. The proportion of first-week deaths was higher among cases reported from programs in Latin America where ETOPFA services were not available. Conclusion Prevalence of BE varied by program and showed a decreasing trend from 2000 to –2014. Mortality is a concern among multiple and syndromic cases, and a high proportion of deaths among cases occurred during the first week of life. Key Points Total prevalence of BE was 2.58 per 100,000 births. Prevalence decreased from 2000 to 2014. The first-week mortality was 9.3%. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose. Studies focusing on safety outcomes typically require large populations to comprehensively characterise the patient groups exposed to the medicines under investigation. However, there is often less information for subpopulations, such as pregnant or breastfeeding women, particularly when new medicines are considered. It is important to understand what information can be obtained from drug utilization studies (DUS) involving pregnant women in the early years postmarketing to provide supportive information for safety studies. The aims of this literature review are to (1) identify and review DUS for new medicines in pregnancy and breastfeeding and (2) list and summarise key information items to be reported in a DUS for new medicines in pregnancy. Methods. To identify postmarketing DUS of new prescription medicines or enantiomers in pregnancy, a systematic literature review was undertaken in PubMed and Embase between January 2015 and June 2022. In addition, the complete database of the ENCePP EU PAS Register was systematically searched to June 2022. Results. We identified 11 published DUS on new medicines in pregnancy from the ENCePP EU PAS Register and none from other sources. No studies on breastfeeding were identified. The 11 identified publications reported the medicine's use for the first 3 to 5 years after marketing approval. No reports assessed utilization in the first 3 years of approval. It was usual to issue interim reports annually (7 studies). All studies concerned conditions managed in ambulatory care (primary care and outpatient facilities) and included some primary care prescribing. Most (n = 8) only had prescribing/dispensing data available at individual level for ambulatory care; outpatient prescribing was included in three of these studies Three studies held a limited amount of in-hospital prescribing data. A DUS can confirm at an early stage whether there are sufficient exposed pregnancies in available data sources to ensure a safety study is powered to detect a difference in the prevalence of adverse pregnancy or infant outcomes or if additional data from other databases are needed. A DUS may also help address methodological considerations such as selection of comparators. DUS can be performed embedded in a DUS in the general population, in a cohort of women of childbearing age, or in a cohort of pregnant women. Conclusion. This review summarises key aspects of a DUS for new medicines in pregnancy. DUS for new medicines in pregnancy should be planned before marketing, scheduled for the first 3 to 5 years after release, with annual interim/progress reports, and reported in peer-reviewed journals. By offering detailed information on data sources, exposure timing, prevalence and location, coprescribing, comorbidities, coexposures, and demographics, a DUS will offer a firm foundation for safety studies and will help to contextualize spontaneous reporting of serious adverse events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Since the presence of a birth defect is often a primary outcome in drug‐safety studies among pregnant women, researching the validity of data collection methods is imperative. The aim of this study is to compare self‐reported birth defects in infants by mothers with the information provided by general practitioners (GP (singular) or GPs (plural)). Methods: Mothers who participated in the Dutch Pregnancy Drug Register reported information about possible birth defects of their infants via questionnaires. GPs were approached to provide information on possible birth defects of the same infants. All reported birth defects by mothers and GPs were blindly coded using the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD‐10) index and EUROCAT‐classified as either a minor or major birth defect. Differences in reported birth defects between participants and GPs were assessed. Results: Participants and GPs (N = 551) reported 67 and 53 birth defects respectively, leading to a total of 120 birth defects among 65 infants. When both the GP and the participant reported a birth defect, 76.9% of these birth defects (N = 60) were coded with an identical ICD‐10 code. Information on the absence of a birth defect and the presence of a major birth defect was identically reported by the GP and the mother in almost all cases (98.2%). Of the major birth defects reported by the GP, 67% could be matched with information provided by the participant, for 33% contradicting information was reported. Conclusion: Self‐reported questionnaire data on infants' birth defects from mothers yield fairly similar information compared to information obtained through GPs. Future studies should validate the accuracy of self‐reported birth defects by mothers more extensively to improve the quality of drug safety studies during pregnancy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Information regarding the risk of early pregnancy COVID‐19 vaccination on the development of major congenital anomalies in the offspring is still limited. Here, we study the association between any COVID‐19 vaccination during the 1st trimester and at least one major non‐genetic congenital anomaly in the offspring. Methods: We used data from the Dutch Pregnancy Drug Register, an ongoing cohort study. We selected participants with a pregnancy that ended after at least 20 weeks gestation. Pregnant participants self‐reported their COVID‐19 vaccination status and the presence of congenital anomalies in the offspring. We used logistic regression analyses to study the association between 1st trimester COVID‐19 vaccination (gestational week 2 + 0 to 12 + 6) and the risk of at least one major non‐genetic congenital anomaly in the offspring. Clustering of anomalies on the ICD10 level by 1st trimester COVID‐19 vaccination status was explored using Fisher exact tests. Results: We included 3721 participants of whom 795 (21.4%) were COVID‐19 vaccinated during the 1st trimester. The percentage of participants who gave birth to a child with at least one major non‐genetic congenital anomaly was comparable between participants who were 1st trimester vaccinated (1.1%) and participants who were not (1.2%) (adjusted odd ratio 0.78 [95% confidence interval 0.35–1.71]). We found no clustering of major non‐genetic congenital anomalies by 1st trimester COVID‐19 vaccination status (p >.05). Conclusions: There were no indications of an increased risk of major non‐genetic congenital anomalies in the offspring after maternal 1st trimester COVID‐19 vaccination. Our findings suggest COVID‐19 vaccines are safe during early pregnancy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Amniotic band syndrome (ABS) and limb body wall complex (LBWC) have an overlapping phenotype of multiple congenital anomalies and their etiology is unknown. We aimed to determine the prevalence of ABS and LBWC in Europe from 1980 to 2019 and to describe the spectrum of congenital anomalies. In addition, we investigated maternal age and multiple birth as possible risk factors for the occurrence of ABS and LBWC. We used data from the European surveillance of congenital anomalies (EUROCAT) network including data from 30 registries over 1980–2019. We included all pregnancy outcomes, including live births, stillbirths, and terminations of pregnancy for fetal anomalies. ABS and LBWC cases were extracted from the central EUROCAT database using coding information responses from the registries. In total, 866 ABS cases and 451 LBWC cases were included in this study. The mean prevalence was 0.53/10,000 births for ABS and 0.34/10,000 births for LBWC during the 40 years. Prevalence of both ABS and LBWC was lower in the 1980s and higher in the United Kingdom. Limb anomalies and neural tube defects were commonly seen in ABS, whereas in LBWC abdominal and thoracic wall defects and limb anomalies were most prevalent. Twinning was confirmed as a risk factor for both ABS and LBWC. This study includes the largest cohort of ABS and LBWC cases ever reported over a large time period using standardized EUROCAT data. Prevalence, clinical characteristics, and the phenotypic spectrum are described, and twinning is confirmed as a risk factor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: We examined the total prevalence, trends in prevalence, and age‐specific mortality among individuals with anorectal malformation (ARM) Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from 24 population‐ and hospital‐based birth defects surveillance programs affiliated with the International Clearinghouse for Birth Defects Surveillance and Research (ICBDSR) from 18 countries and for births from 1974 to 2014. We estimated pooled and program‐specific total prevalence per 10,000 total births. Poisson regression was used to assess time trends in prevalence from 2001 to 2012 when most programs contributed data. We calculated selected age‐specific proportions of deaths, stratified by case status Results: The pooled total prevalence of ARM was 3.26 per 10,000 total births (95% Confidence Interval = 3.19, 3.32) for birth years 1974–2014. About 60% of cases were multiple or syndromic. Prevalence of multiple, syndromic, and stillborn cases decreased from 2001 to 2012. The first week mortality proportion was 12.5%, 3.2%, 28.3%, and 18.2% among all, isolated, multiple, and syndromic cases, respectively Conclusions: ARM is relatively rare, with multiple and syndromic cases showing decreasing prevalence during the study period. Mortality is a concern during the first week of life, and especially among multiple and syndromic cases. Our descriptive epidemiological findings increase our understanding of geographic variation in the prevalence of ARM and can be used to plan needed clinical services. Exploring factors influencing prevalence and mortality among individuals with ARM could inform future studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]