4.2 Article

Sex and congenital malformations: An international perspective

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL GENETICS PART A
Volume 134A, Issue 1, Pages 49-57

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.a.30514

Keywords

sex ratio; sex; epidemiology; congenital malformations

Funding

  1. ODCDC CDC HHS [U50/CCU207141] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study evaluated the sex distribution of major isolated malformations and common trisomies among a large and geographically varied sample. Eighteen registries from 24 countries contributed cases, which were centrally reviewed and classified in three clinical types as isolated, associated, or syndromic. We selected cases of 26 major defects (n = 108,534); trisomy 21, 18, and 13 (n = 30,114); other syndromes (n = 2,898); and multiple congenital anomalies (n = 24,197), for a total of 165,743 cases. We observed a significant deviation of sex distribution (compared to a sex ratio of 1.06 or male proportion of 51.4%) for 24 of the 29 groups (a male excess in 16, a female excess in 8), and in 8 of such groups these estimates varied significantly across registries. A male excess was noted for two left obstructive cardiac defects (hypoplastic left heart and coarctation of the aorta) and a female excess for all the main types of neural tube defects. A male excess was seen for omphalocele but not gastroschisis. For neural tube defects the female excess tended to be stronger in areas with historically high prevalence for these defects. For 15 of the 26 birth defects the sex distribution differed among isolated, associated, and syndromic cases. Some of these epidemiologic commonalities are consistent with known or putative developmental processes. Further, the geographic variation for some defects may reflect local prevalence rates and risk factors. Finally, the findings underscore the need for clinical classification (e.g., into isolated, multiple, syndromes) in studies of birth defects. Published 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available