한빛사
>
상위피인용논문
상위피인용논문
- 조회339
부산대학교
Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand., 2022 May;101(5):484-498 | https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.14339
Congenital anomalies and maternal age: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies
Damin Ahn 1 †, Jieon Kim 1 †, Junyeong Kang 1 †, Yun Hak Kim 2 3 4 †, Kihun Kim 5 *
1School of Dentistry, Pusan National University, Yangsan, Republic of Korea.
2Department of Biomedical Informatics, School of Medicine, Yangsan, Pusan National University, Gyeongsangnam-do, Republic of Korea.
3Department of Anatomy, School of Medicine, Yangsan, Pusan National University, Gyeongsangnam-do, Republic of Korea.
4Research Institute for Convergence of Biomedical Science and Technology, Yangsan, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Gyeongsangnam-do, Republic of Korea.
5Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Kosin University Gospel Hospital, Busan, Republic of Korea.
2Department of Biomedical Informatics, School of Medicine, Yangsan, Pusan National University, Gyeongsangnam-do, Republic of Korea.
3Department of Anatomy, School of Medicine, Yangsan, Pusan National University, Gyeongsangnam-do, Republic of Korea.
4Research Institute for Convergence of Biomedical Science and Technology, Yangsan, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Gyeongsangnam-do, Republic of Korea.
5Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Kosin University Gospel Hospital, Busan, Republic of Korea.
†Damin Ahn, Jieon Kim, Junyeong Kang and Yun Hak Kim contributed equally to this work as first authors.
*Corresponding author: correspondence to Kihun Kim
*Corresponding author: correspondence to Kihun Kim
Abstract
Introduction
Several studies have reported on the maternal age-associated risks of congenital anomalies. However, there is a paucity of studies with comprehensive review of anomalies. We aimed to quantify the risk of birth defects in children born to middle-aged mothers compared with that in children born to young or older mothers.
Material and methods
We classified maternal ages into three groups: young (<20 years old), middle (20–34 years old) and older age (≥35 years old). Observational studies that met our age criteria were eligible for inclusion. The articles searched using the Embase and MEDLINE databases were those published from 1989 to January 21, 2021. The Newcastle–Ottawa scale was used to assess the risk of bias. If heterogeneity exceeded 50%, the random effect method was used; otherwise, the fixed-effect method was used. Prospero registration number: CRD42021235229.
Results
We included 15 cohort, 14 case–control and 36 cross-sectional studies. The pooled unadjusted odds ratio (95% CI) of any congenital anomaly was 1.64 (1.40–1.92) and 1.05 (0.95–1.15) in the older and young age groups, respectively (very low quality of evidence). The pooled unadjusted odds ratio of chromosomal anomaly was 5.64 (5.13–6.20) and 0.69 (0.54–0.88) in the older and young age groups, respectively. The pooled unadjusted odds ratio of non-chromosomal anomaly was 1.09 (1.01–1.17) and 1.10 (1.01–1.21) in the older and young age groups, respectively (very low quality of evidence). The incidence of abdominal wall defects was increased in children of women in the young maternal age group.
Conclusions
We identified that very low quality evidence suggests that women in the older maternal age group had increased odds of having children with congenital anomalies compared with those in the 20–34 year age group. There was no increase in odds of children with congenital anomalies in women of <20 year age group except for abdominal defects compared with those in the 20–34 year age group. The results stem from very low quality evidence with no adjustment of confounders.
Several studies have reported on the maternal age-associated risks of congenital anomalies. However, there is a paucity of studies with comprehensive review of anomalies. We aimed to quantify the risk of birth defects in children born to middle-aged mothers compared with that in children born to young or older mothers.
Material and methods
We classified maternal ages into three groups: young (<20 years old), middle (20–34 years old) and older age (≥35 years old). Observational studies that met our age criteria were eligible for inclusion. The articles searched using the Embase and MEDLINE databases were those published from 1989 to January 21, 2021. The Newcastle–Ottawa scale was used to assess the risk of bias. If heterogeneity exceeded 50%, the random effect method was used; otherwise, the fixed-effect method was used. Prospero registration number: CRD42021235229.
Results
We included 15 cohort, 14 case–control and 36 cross-sectional studies. The pooled unadjusted odds ratio (95% CI) of any congenital anomaly was 1.64 (1.40–1.92) and 1.05 (0.95–1.15) in the older and young age groups, respectively (very low quality of evidence). The pooled unadjusted odds ratio of chromosomal anomaly was 5.64 (5.13–6.20) and 0.69 (0.54–0.88) in the older and young age groups, respectively. The pooled unadjusted odds ratio of non-chromosomal anomaly was 1.09 (1.01–1.17) and 1.10 (1.01–1.21) in the older and young age groups, respectively (very low quality of evidence). The incidence of abdominal wall defects was increased in children of women in the young maternal age group.
Conclusions
We identified that very low quality evidence suggests that women in the older maternal age group had increased odds of having children with congenital anomalies compared with those in the 20–34 year age group. There was no increase in odds of children with congenital anomalies in women of <20 year age group except for abdominal defects compared with those in the 20–34 year age group. The results stem from very low quality evidence with no adjustment of confounders.
논문정보
- Review Paper
- 2022년 05월 (BRIC 등록일 2025-02-10)
- 국내 연구진
- 의약학 > 유전 및 유전체의학
- 60회 이상 인용된 논문
댓글 작성 로그인
팝업 닫기
소속기관 논문보기
관련분야 논문보기
