4.5 Article

Long-term growth of children with autoantibody-mediated congenital heart block

Journal

ACTA PAEDIATRICA
Volume 102, Issue 7, Pages 718-726

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/apa.12248

Keywords

Congenital heart block; Development; Growth; Ro; SSA autoantibodies; Weight

Categories

Funding

  1. Swedish Research Council
  2. Heart-Lung Foundation
  3. Stockholm County Council
  4. Karolinska Institutet
  5. Swedish Rheumatism Association
  6. King Gustaf the V:th 80-year Foundation
  7. Torsten and Ragnar Soderberg Foundation
  8. Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation
  9. Kempe-Carlgrenska Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aim To analyse growth of children with and without congenital heart block (CHB) born to anti-Ro/SSA positive mothers from birth to 18years of age, using a population-based cohort of Swedish CHB patients. Methods Medical records for siblings with (n=72) and without (n=60) CHB born 1973-2009 to anti-Ro/SSA positive mothers were retrieved from child healthcare centres and school health services and used to extract data on growth from birth to 18years. Results Compared with reference standards, children with CHB were retarded in weight by 0.75-1.0 SD from birth to 2-3years of age. Thereafter, the CHB children started to catch up, reaching the reference standards at 9-11years of age. Pacemaker treatment was not correlated with the catch-up in growth. Individuals with CHB were retarded in both weight and height from birth to 9-11years of age when compared to siblings without CHB, who did not demonstrate restriction in these measurements. Conclusion Presence of CHB is a more important predictor of growth restriction than maternal rheumatic disease and foetal anti-Ro/SSA exposure. The restriction persists for several years after birth, despite pacemaker treatment, which highlights the importance of follow-up of children with CHB regarding nutrition and growth.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available