Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Reproductive Health
Published in: Reproductive Health 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research

Prevalence of birth defects in an Arctic Russian setting from 1973 to 2011: a register-based study

Authors: Vitaly A Postoev, Evert Nieboer, Andrej M Grjibovski, Jon Øyvind Odland

Published in: Reproductive Health | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Birth defects (BD) constitute an important public health issue as they are the main cause of infant death. Their prevalence in Europe for 2008–2012 was 25.6 per 1000 newborns. To date, there are no population-based studies for the Russian Federation. The aim of the present study is to estimate the prevalence of BD, its forms, and changes over time in the Russian Arctic city of Monchegorsk (Murmansk County) for the period 1973–2011.

Methods

The Murmansk County Birth Register and the Kola Birth Register were the primary sources of information, covering 30448 pregnancy outcomes in Monchegorsk (Murmansk County, Russia) during the study period.

Results

The total perinatal prevalence of BD was 36.1/1000 live births (LB) and stillborn (SB) (95% CI = 34.0-38.2). After exclusions of minor malformations according to the European Surveillance of Congenital Anomalies guidelines, it decreased to 26.5/1000 LB plus SB (95% CI = 24.6-28.3). The perinatal prevalence of BD that are obligatory to report in Russia was 7.3/1000 LB plus SB (95% CI = 6.4-8.3). There was a significant positive time-trend in total perinatal prevalence of birth defects across the study period (p < 0.001 for trend). Prevalence of all BD increased from 23.5/1000 to 46.3/1000 (LB plus SB), while that excluding minor defects rose from 17.7/1000 to 35.7/1000 (LB plus SB). The most prevalent group of defects was malformations of the musculoskeletal system, which represented 35.4% of all BD. The most prominent increase was observed for the urinary system, rising from 0.2/1000 to 19.1/1000 (LB plus SB).

Conclusions

The observed perinatal prevalence of BD in Monchegorsk increased two-fold during the 38-year study period. Further investigations to identify the underlying bases for the observed progressive growth in BD are recommended.
Literature
1.
2.
Kobrinskaya BA, Demikova NS: Principles of establishing of birth defects’ monitoring in Russian Federation (Principy organizatcii monitoringa vrozhdennyh porokov razvitiya i ego realizaciya v Rossiyskoy Federacii – in Russian).Russian Bulletin of Perinatology and Pediatrics 2001, 4:55–60.
3.
4.
Korsunskiy AA: Infant mortality in Russian Federation. The ways for decreasing (report at the Board of Ministry of Health of Russian Federation 09.01.2001) (Mladencheskaja smertnost v Rossijskoy Federacii. Puti snizheniya (izlozhenie doklada na kollegii Ministerstva Zdravoohranenija Rossijskoy Federacii 09.01.2001 – in Russian).Pediatry 2001, 2:5.
5.
Order of Ministry of Health of Russian Federation № 268 10.09.1998: About Monitoring of Congenital Birth Defects Among Children“ (Prikaz Ministerstva Zdravoohranenija Rossijskoj Federacii N 268 ”O Monitoring Vrozhdennih Porokov Razvinija u Detej” – in Russian. . Moscow: Intersen; 1999.
6.
7.
8.
Vaktskjold A, Talykova LV, Chashchin VP, Nieboer E, Thomassen Y, Odland JO: Genital malformations in newborns of female nickel-refinery workers.Scand J Work Environ Health 2006,32(1):41–50. 10.5271/sjweh.975CrossRefPubMed
9.
Vaktskjold A, Talykova LV, Chashchin VP, Odland JO, Nieboer E: Maternal nickel exposure and congenital musculoskeletal defects.Am J Ind Med 2008,51(11):825–33. 10.1002/ajim.20609CrossRefPubMed
10.
Petrova JG, Vaktskjold A: The incidence of neural tube defects in Norway and the Arkhangelskaja Oblast in Russia and the association with maternal age.Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2009,88(6):667–72. 10.1080/00016340902898008CrossRefPubMed
11.
Petrova JG, Vaktskjold A: The incidence and maternal age distribution of abdominal wall defects in Norway and Arkhangelskaja Oblast in Russia.Int J Circumpolar Health 2009,68(1):75–83.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Kirillova EA, Nikiforova OK, Ghuchenko NA, Pobedinsky NM, Krasnikov DG: Monitoring of birth defects among newborns (Monitoring vrogdennih porokov razvitija u novorogdennih – in Russian).Russian Bulletin of Perinatology and Pediatrics 2000, 1:18–21.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Odland JO, Tchachtchine VP, Bykov V, Fiskebeck PE, Lund E, Thomassen Y, et al.: Critical evaluation of medical, statistical, and occupational data sources in the Kola Peninsula of Russia pertinent to reproductive health studies.Int Arch Occup Environ Health 1999,72(3):151–60. 10.1007/s004200050354CrossRefPubMed
17.
Anda EE, Nieboer E, Voitov AV, Kovalenko AA, Lapina YM, Voitova EA, et al.: Implementation, quality control and selected pregnancy outcomes of the Murmansk county birth registry in Russia.Int J Circumpolar Health 2008,67(4):318–34.CrossRefPubMed
18.
19.
Mason CA, Kirby RS, Sever LE, Langlois PH: Prevalence is the preferred measure of frequency of birth defects.Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol 2005, 73:690–2. 10.1002/bdra.20211CrossRefPubMed
20.
Dolk H, Loane M, Garne E: The prevalence of congenital anomalies in Europe.Adv Exp Med Biol 2010, 686:349–64. 10.1007/978-90-481-9485-8_20CrossRefPubMed
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
Morgenstern W, Tsechkovski MS, Nussel E, Schettler G A joint publication with WHO Regional Office for Europe. In CINDI Countrywide Integrated Noncommunicable Diseases Intervention Programme. Baseline Evaluation. Berlin: Springer; 1991.
Metadata
Title
Prevalence of birth defects in an Arctic Russian setting from 1973 to 2011: a register-based study
Authors
Vitaly A Postoev
Evert Nieboer
Andrej M Grjibovski
Jon Øyvind Odland
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Reproductive Health / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1742-4755
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-4755-12-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

Reproductive Health 1/2015 Go to the issue

Review

Behaviour change techniques and contraceptive use in low and middle income countries: a review

Research

An exploratory study of what happens to women who are denied abortions in Cape Town, South Africa

Research

Intimate partner violence and termination of pregnancy: a cross-sectional study of married Bangladeshi women

Research

Domestic violence against women and associated factors in Ethiopia; systematic review

Research

Socio-cultural and economic factors influencing adolescents’ resilience against the threat of teenage pregnancy: a cross-sectional survey in Accra, Ghana

Research

Interpersonal communication as an agent of normative influence: a mixed method study among the urban poor in India