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 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

LIVE: Thursday 2nd May 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

Quality sleep is essential for health. But what happens to our brains when sleep patterns are disturbed? Join our experts to explore the interplay between sleep disruption and neurological diseases, and the questions that you need to be asking your patients to help you prevent the harmful effects of sleep deprivation.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
Published in: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research article

Changes in detection of birth defects and perinatal mortality after introduction of prenatal ultrasound screening in the Kola Peninsula (North-West Russia): combination of two birth registries

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

Published in: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Prenatal diagnostics ultrasound was established in Russia in 2000 as a routine method of screening for birth defects. The aims of the current study were twofold: to assess changes in birth defects prevalence at birth and perinatal mortality after ultrasound screening was implemented and to estimate prenatal detection rates for congenital malformations in the city of Monchegorsk (Murmansk County, North-West Russia).

Methods

The Murmansk County Birth Registry and the Kola Birth Registry were the primary sources of information, and include 30 448 pregnancy outcomes in Monchegorsk for the period 1973–2011. Data from these registries were supplemented with information derived from hospital records about pregnancy terminations for 2000–2007.

Results

The total number of newborns with any kind of birth defects in Monchegorsk during 1973–2011 was 1099, of whom 816 were born in the 1973–2000 period. The prevalence of defects at birth increased from 34.2/1000 (95 % CI = 31.9-36.5) to 42.8/1000 newborns (95 % CI = 38.0-47.7) after prenatal ultrasound screening was formally implemented. We observed significant decreases (p < 0.05) in the birth prevalence of congenital malformations of the circulatory system, the musculoskeletal system (including deformations), and other (excluding multiple); those of the urinary system increased from 0.9/1000 to 17.1/1000 (p < 0.0001). The perinatal mortality among newborns with any kind of malformation decreased from 106.6 per 1000 newborns with birth defects (95 % CI = 84.3-129.1) to 21.2 (95 % CI = 4.3-38.1). Mothers who had undergone at least one ultrasound examination during pregnancy (n = 9883) had a decreased risk of having a newborn die during the perinatal period [adjusted OR = 0.49 (95 % CI = 0.27-0.89)]. The overall prenatal detection rate was 34.9 % with the highest for malformations of the nervous system.

Conclusion

Improved detection of severe malformations with subsequent pregnancy termination was likely the main contributor to the observed decrease in perinatal mortality in Murmansk County, Russia.
Literature
1.
Wiesel A, Queisser-Luft A, Clementi M, Bianca S, Stoll C, the EUROSCAN Study Group. Prenatal detection of congenital renal malformations by fetal ultrasonographic examination: an analysis of 709,030 births in 12 European countries. Eur J Med Genet. 2005;48:131–44.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Kancherla V, Oakley Jr GP, Brent RL. Urgent global opportunities to prevent birth defects. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014;19(3):153–60.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Saari-Kemppainen A, Karjalainen O, Ylostalo P, Heinonen OP. Ultrasound screening and perinatal mortality: controlled trial of systematic one-stage screening in pregnancy. Lancet. 1990;336:387–91.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Crane JP, LeFevre ML, Winborn RC, Evans JK, Ewigman BG, Bain RP, et al. A randomized trial of prenatal ultrasonographic screening: impact on the detection, management, and outcome of anomalous fetuses. The RADIUS Study Group. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1994;171(2):392–9.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Garne E, Loane M, Dolk H, De Vigan C, Scarano G, Tuckeret D, et al. Prenatal diagnosis of severe structural congenital malformations in Europe. Ultrasound Obstetr Gynecol. 2005;25:6–11.CrossRef
6.
De Vigan C, Baena N, Cariati E, Clementi M, Stoll C, the EUROSCAN working group. Contribution of ultrasonographic examination to the prenatal detection of chromosomal abnormalities in 19 centers across Europe. Ann Genet. 2001;44:209–17.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Stoll C, Dott B, Alembik Y, De Geeter B. Evaluation and evolution during time of prenatal diagnosis of congenital heart diseases by routine fetal ultrasonographic examination. Ann Genet. 2002;45:21–7.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Van der Pal-de Bruin KM, Graafmans W, Biermans MC, Richardus JH, Zijlstra AG, Reefhuis J, et al. The influence of prenatal screening and termination of pregnancy on perinatal mortality rates. Prenat Diagn. 2002;22(11):966–72.CrossRef
9.
Order of Ministry of Health № 457 28.12.2000. “About improvement of perinatal diagnostic and prophylactic congenital diseases among children” (in Russian).
10.
Order of Ministry of Health and social development № 736 03.12.2007. “About approval of medical indications for induced termination of pregnancy” (in Russian).
11.
Murashko MA, Patrushev AV. Examination of congenital and inherited pathology of newborn in Komi republic (in Russian). Problems Exp Med. 2005;3(19):53–5.
12.
Tsurkan SV. Strategies of population-based prevention of congenital pathology (in Russian). Kazan Med J. 2011;92(3):449–52.
13.
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.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Postoev VA, Nieboer E, Grjibovski AM, Odland JO. Prevalence of birth defects in an Arctic Russian setting from 1973 to 2011: a register-based study. Reprod Health. 2015;12:3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
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.CrossRefPubMed
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.CrossRefPubMed
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.
Khoshnood B, Greenlees R, Loane M, Dolk H, on behalf of the EUROCAT Project Management Committee and a EUROCAT Working Group. Paper 2: EUROCAT Public Health Indicators for Congenital Anomalies in Europe. Birth Defects Research (Part A). Clin Mol Teratol. 2011;91:S16–22.CrossRef
19.
Starodubova VI, Suhanova LP. Reproductive problems of demographics development of Russia (in Russian). Moscow: Manager of health care; 2012.
20.
21.
The decree of the Government of the Russian Federation № 485 11.08.2003. “About list of social indications for induced abortion” (in Russian).
22.
The decree of the Government of the Russian Federation № 98 06.02.2012. “About the social indication for induced abortion” (in Russian).
23.
Luck CA. Value of routine ultrasound scanning at 19 weeks: a four-year study of 8849 deliveries. Br Med J. 1992;304:1474–8.CrossRef
24.
Meberg A. Congenital heart defects through 30 years. Open J Pediatr. 2012;2:219–27.CrossRef
25.
Bjornard K, Riehle-Colarusso T, Gilboa SM, Correa A. Patterns in the prevalence of congenital heart defects, metropolitan Atlanta, 1978 to 2005. Birth Defects Research (Part A). Clin Mol Teratol. 2013;2(97):87–94.CrossRef
26.
27.
Bricker L, Garcia J, Henderson J, Mugford M, Neilson J, Roberts T, et al. Ultrasound screening in pregnancy: a systematic review of the clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and women’s views. Health Technol Assess. 2000;4(16):1–193.
28.
29.
Judina EV, Medvedev MV. Multicenter study “Prenatal diagnostic of Down syndrome on Russia in 2005, or perinatal drama in three parts with prologue and epilogue” (in Russian). Prenatal Diagn. 2007;6(4):252–7.
Metadata
Title
Changes in detection of birth defects and perinatal mortality after introduction of prenatal ultrasound screening in the Kola Peninsula (North-West Russia): combination of two birth registries
Authors
Vitaly A. Postoev
Andrej M. Grjibovski
Evert Nieboer
Jon Øyvind Odland
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2393
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-015-0747-1

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 1/2015 Go to the issue

Research article

Adverse obstetric outcomes in pregnancies resulting from oocyte donation: a retrospective cohort case study in Sweden

Research article

Low birth weight and prenatal care in Colombia: a cross-sectional study

Research article

Effects of a midwife psycho-education intervention to reduce childbirth fear on women’s birth outcomes and postpartum psychological wellbeing

Research article

Boosting facility deliveries with results-based financing: a mixed-methods evaluation of the government midwifery incentive scheme in Cambodia

Research article

The validity of a food frequency questionnaire as a measure of PUFA status in pregnancy

Research article

Unexpected consequences: women’s experiences of a self-hypnosis intervention to help with pain relief during labour