Birth defects data from population‐based birth defects surveillance programs in the United States, 2007 to 2011: Highlighting orofacial clefts

Cara, T.; Cassell, Cynthia H.; Meyer, Robert E.; Isenburg, Jennifer; Canfield, Mark A.; Rickard, Russel; Olney, Richard S.; Stallings, Erin B.; Beck, M. Nenadov; Hashmi, S. Shahrukh; Cho, Sook Ja; Kirby, Russell S.

doi:10.1002/bdra.23329

Cited by 110 publications

(116 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

106

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of these nine cases, one (7 %) had normal karyotype (entry 11) and three (21 %) had an abnormal one -structural chromosomal aberrations twice (entries 1 and 4) and triploidy once (entry 6). The cultivation of fi ve samples was unsuccessful (entries 5,[8][9][10]12) and the determination of their karyotype was impossible. Four cases (29 %) in R II group had normal karyotype (entries 2, 3, 7 and 11) -two cases had a unilateral CLP on the left side (entries 2 and 7), one on the right side (entry 3) and the already mentioned one had a bilateral CLP (entry 11).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Four cases (29 %) in R II group had normal karyotype (entries 2, 3, 7 and 11) -two cases had a unilateral CLP on the left side (entries 2 and 7), one on the right side (entry 3) and the already mentioned one had a bilateral CLP (entry 11). Associated congenital disorders were found in 11 cases (79 %; entries 3-4, 6-14) -3 with unilateral CLP (once on the left side in entry 7 and twice on the right side in entries 3 and 13), 7 with bilateral CLP (entries 4,6,[8][9][10][11][12] and one where the laterality is unknown (entry 14).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Can we predict orofacial cleft in future pregnancy?

Malová¹,

Braxatorisová²,

Luha³

et al. 2016

BLL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AIM: The aim of this thesis was not only to defi ne the frequency of all orofacial clefts and their particular types, but also to determine the sex of an embryo or fetus and detect associated developmental and chromosomal abnormalities. Approximately one third of orofacial clefts are a part of chromosomal syndromes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective morphological and cytogenetic study of 43 cases of different types of orofacial clefts between 1992-2014 from miscarriages (spontaneous abortions) and premature births. RESULTS: Associated abnormalities were found in 34 cases. Most of the anomalies were skeletal anomalies (29), NTD (24) and anomalies of the abdominal wall (9). Most associated anomalies were found in the R III group (93.3 %). Eleven of the successfully cultivated cases (26 %) had a normal karyotype and in 14 of the cases (32 %), numerical or unbalanced structural chromosomal aberrations were found. CONCLUSION: Our data did not show that isolated clefts were not associated with a higher risk of chromosomal aberrations. Higher percentage of chromosomal aberrations found in isolated clefts in our pool can be explained by the age of the embryos and fetuses -usually between day 43 and week 12. It is nearly impossible to diagnose some associated congenital defects at such an early age. Thanks to the morphological and cytogenetic analysis of embryos and fetuses with orofacial cleft, it is possible to estimate if not determine the etiologic factor which infl uenced the miscarriage. Additionally, in the case of birth defects, the prognosis for future pregnancy can be offered, which is important information for gynecologist and clinical geneticist (Tab. 5, Fig. 5, Ref. 31). Text in PDF www.elis.sk.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can we predict orofacial cleft in future pregnancy?

Malová¹,

Braxatorisová²,

Luha³

et al. 2016

BLL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Oral clefts (OCs) are amongst the most prevalent congenital malformations, arising in 1 per 700 live births . Two third of all OC are classified as cleft lip (CL) or CL and palate (CLP); the rest are deformities of the palate alone (CP) . Although most OCs are isolated, they may be accompanied by other congenital malformations (24%) and sometimes occur in the context of a genetic syndrome or chromosomal anomaly (12%) .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Polyhydramnios in isolated oral cleft pregnancies: incidence and outcome in a retrospective study

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Isolated oral clefts, including cleft lip only (CL), cleft lip and palate (CLP) and cleft palate only (CP), affect 1 in ∼700 live births 1. In the USA, children with oral clefts are typically cared for by interdisciplinary teams for surgical repair of the cleft and follow-up care for complications with feeding, speech and dental/orthodontic needs 2–4.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Children with oral clefts are at greater risk for persistent low achievement in school than classmates

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To examine trajectories in academic achievement for children with oral clefts versus unaffected classmates and explore predictors of persistently low achievement among children with oral clefts. Design Longitudinal cohort study of academic achievement in a population-based sample. Setting and Participants Children born from 1983 through 2003 with oral clefts were identified from the Iowa Registry for Congenital and Inherited Disorders and matched to unaffected classmates by sex, school/school district, and month and year of birth. Main Outcome Measures Academic achievement was measured from Iowa Testing Programs (ITP) data. Outcomes included achievement scores in reading, language, and mathematics. Results Academic achievement data were available for 586 children with oral clefts and 1,873 unaffected classmates. Achievement trajectories were stable for both groups. Children with oral clefts were more likely than their classmates to be classified into persistent, low achievement trajectories, including when adjusting for socioeconomic differences: OR=1.63, 95% CI: 1.23–2.16 for reading; OR=1.73, 95% CI: 1.29–2.31 for language; OR=1.45, 95% CI: 1.05–1.99 for math. Predictors of low achievement were cleft palate only (versus other cleft types), adolescent mothers, low maternal education, and less frequent use of prenatal care. Conclusions Most children have steady academic trajectories and children with oral clefts are at greater risk for persistent, low achievement in school than unaffected classmates. These findings support the need for routine, early screening for academic deficits in this population. Cleft palate only, low parental education and adolescent mothers are associated with increased risk for persistent low achievement.

show abstract

Birth defects data from population‐based birth defects surveillance programs in the United States, 2007 to 2011: Highlighting orofacial clefts

Abstract: © 2014 The Authors Birth Defects Research Part A: Clinical and Molecular Teratology Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Cited by 110 publications

References 36 publications

Can we predict orofacial cleft in future pregnancy?

Can we predict orofacial cleft in future pregnancy?

Polyhydramnios in isolated oral cleft pregnancies: incidence and outcome in a retrospective study

Children with oral clefts are at greater risk for persistent low achievement in school than classmates

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About