Details
Category: Volume 07 Issue 03 March 2019
Hits: 1462

Title: Profile of congenital surgical anomalies among admitted neonates – A retrospective study from a rural tertiary care centre, South India

Authors: Mohanavel Pannerselvam, Harikrishnan Elangovan, Karthick E

 DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v7i3.32

Abstract

Introduction: Congenital anomalies (CAs) are common and are one of the leading causes neonatal and childhood mortality and morbidity. The present study thus endeavours to estimate the burden of congenital surgical anomalies in a tertiary care centre so that the information can be used to prioritize resources for prevention and control.

Methods: This is a retrospective hospital-based one year study. Information regarding maternal age, parity, risk factors like consanguinity and bad obstetric history were recorded. Neonatal information like type of congenital anomaly and system affected, gestational age, sex, birth weight, need for resuscitation, APGAR score in the neonate and outcomes were recorded. All the congenital anomalies were classified as per International Classification of Diseases version 10 (ICD – 10).

Results: Out of 3747 admissions, 2800 babies were inborn and 947 were out born. The total number of babies with congenital anomalies was 118, of which 77 babies have surgical anomalies. Male and female babies are equally affected (1:1). Higher frequency of congenital surgical anomalies were seen in term babies (74%), normal birth weight babies (59.7%) and born to mothers aged 21-25 years (51.9%). The most common system involved is Cleft lip and palate (19) with combined cleft lip and palate (12) as the most common anomaly. Out of 77 babies, 60 were discharged, 8 were referred and 9 were expired in the immediate neonatal period.

Conclusion: This study shows that the congenital malformations are still a burden to address and the pattern of congenital surgical anomalies varies from centre to centre. Similar multi-centric studies would contribute the understanding of pattern and prevalence of congenital anomalies which enables the government to plan appropriate intervention measures and its timing to reduce the early childhood morbidity.

Keywords: Congenital Anomalies, Surgical Anomalies, Neonates.

References

  1. World Health Organization. Section on congenital anomalies. Available from: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs370/en/ Accessed February 2019.
  2. UNICEF. Neonatal Health. Available at Unicef.in/whatwedo/2/Neonatal-Health
  3. National health Portal of India. Section on congenital anomalies (birth defects). Available at https://www.nhp.gov.in/disease/gynaecology-and-obstertrics/congenital-anomalies-birth-defects
  4. Infant Mortality rate in Tamilnadu, NITI Aayog, Government of India, http://niti.gov.in/content/infant-mortality-rate-imr-1000-live-births, accessed on 20th February 2019.
  5. Shija JK. Neonatal surgical problems in Dar-es-Salaam, Tanzania. Med J Zambia 1977;11:139-43.
  6.  Tirumani HB, Khatija S. Profile of congenital malformations in a tertiary care level neonatal intensive care unit. Int J Contemp Pediatr 2017;4:1634-7.
  7. Dolk, H., Loane, M., & Garne, E. (2010). The Prevalence of Congenital Anomalies in Europe. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, 349–364.
  8. Pandala P, Kotha R, Singh H, Nirmala C. Pattern of congenital anomalies in neonates at tertiary care centre in Hyderabad, India: a hospital based prospective observational study. Int J Contemp Pediatr 2019;6:63-7.
  9. Pabbati J, Subramanian P, Sudharshan RC, Sadhana N, Rao R. Study on incidence of congenital anomalies in a rural teaching hospital, Telangana, India. Int J Contemp Pediatr 2016;3:887-90.
  10. Ara A, Kumar D, Dewan D, Digra NC. Incidence of congenital anomalies in a rural population of Jammu - A prospective study. Indian J Public Health 2018;62:188-92
  11. Kalra A, Kalra K, Sharma V, Singh M, Dayal RS. Congenital malformations. Indian Pediatr. 1984;24:945-50.
  1. Suguna Bai NS, Mascarene M, Syamalan K, Nair PM. An etiological study of congenital malformation in the newborn. Indian Pediatr. 1982;19:1003-7.
  2. Mathur BC, Karan S, Vijaya Devi KK. Congenital malformations in the newborn. Indian Pediatr. 1975;12:179-83.
  3. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2013 Mar;50(2):224-30. doi: 10.1597/10-223. Epub 2011 Sep 9.
  4. Wiggman K, Larson M, Larson O, Semb G, Brattstorm V. The influence of the initial width of the cleft palate patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate related to the final treatment outcome in the maxilla at 17 years of age. Eur J Ortho 2013 Jun;35(3):335-340
  5. De Wals P, Tairou F, Van Allen MI, UhSH, Lowery RB Sibbald B, Evans JA, Van den Hof MC, Zimmer P, Crowley M, et al. Reduction in neural tube defects after folic acid fortification in Canada. N Engl J Med 2007 Jul 12;357(2):135-142
  6. Delpont, M., Lafosse, T., Bachy, M., Mary, P., Alves, A., & Vialle, R. (2015). Anomalies des pieds à la naissance. Archives de Pédiatrie, 22(3), 331–336. doi:10.1016/j.arcped.2014.11.009.

Corresponding Author

Dr Harikrishnan Elangovan, MD (Paediatrics)

Associate Professor of Paediatrics, Government Villupuram Medical College, Villupuram, India

Phone No: 9884904428, Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.