3.9 Article

Descriptive study on neural tube defects in Argentina

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/bdra.23372

关键词

neural tube defects; public health surveillance; birth defects epidemiology; Argentina; congenital anomalies; spina bifida; anencephaly; encephalocele

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundNeural tube defects (NTDs) are the most common congenital anomalies of the central nervous system. Prevalence of NTDs varies depending on geographic region and folic acid fortification. The main objectives of this study are to analyze the prevalences of NTDs reported to the National Registry of Congenital Anomalies of Argentina (RENAC) during the period 2009 to 2013, to compare them with data from other selected surveillance systems of the Americas, and to evaluate the impact of folic acid fortification on the prevalence of NTDs in Argentina. MethodsWe analyzed changes in prevalence between 2009 and 2013 for the RENAC, and differences in prevalence between RENAC and other surveillance systems. We evaluated changes for the pre and postfortification time periods in Argentina. ResultsIn Argentina, anencephaly and spina bifida showed no statistically significant variation between 2009 and 2013, and encephalocele showed a statistically significant decline. The RENAC showed a statistically significant higher prevalence for all three defects when compared with surveillance systems from Chile, Colombia, and Costa Rica, and a statistically significant lower birth prevalence than Cuba for anencephaly. No differences were observed when comparing it to the Atlanta-USA and Mexico systems. A significant decrease in prevalence was observed for all three anomalies for the postfortification period in Argentina. ConclusionThe characteristics of cases reported to the RENAC are similar to those already reported in the literature. The differences in prevalence between the RENAC and other surveillance systems could be artifactual or real. We confirmed the decrease of prevalence of NTDs after folic acid fortification. Birth Defects Research (Part A) 103:509-516, 2015. (c) 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据