Newborn

Register      Login

VOLUME 3 , ISSUE 3 ( July-September, 2024 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Down Syndrome is the Leading Indication for Late-stage Termination of Pregnancy in Mongolia

Jargalsaikhan Badarch, Gunjana Kumar, Budzaya Enkhbayar, Terkhen Turbat, Tegshjargal Sereenendorj, Batbayar Tumurkhuleg, Srijan Singh, Alvaro Dendi, Amita Singhal, Akhil Maheshwari, On behalf of the Global Newborn Society (GNS) Down Syndrome Foundation

Keywords : Birth defect, Chromosomal anomalies, Cleft lip, Cleft palate, Combined defect, Congenital anomalies, Down syndrome, European surveillance of congenital anomalies, International classification of diseases, Termination of pregnancy for fetal anomaly

Citation Information : Badarch J, Kumar G, Enkhbayar B, Turbat T, Sereenendorj T, Tumurkhuleg B, Singh S, Dendi A, Singhal A, Maheshwari A, On behalf of the Global Newborn Society (GNS) Down Syndrome Foundation. Down Syndrome is the Leading Indication for Late-stage Termination of Pregnancy in Mongolia. 2024; 3 (3):180-189.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-11002-0099

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 30-09-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2024; The Author(s).


Abstract

Background: Prenatal sonograms frequently show congenital anomalies in fetuses. As expected, families receiving information about severe or multi-system anomalies experience ceaseless distress and may request for termination of the pregnancy. This study was designed to identify the most frequent indications for termination of pregnancy for fetal anomalies (TOPFAs). These data can help in early detection, which can then facilitate informed decisions either for safe terminations or for well-timed fetal procedures for rehabilitation. This information is also important for appropriate genetic testing and assessment of the risk of recurrence in later pregnancies. Objective: To investigate the frequency and epidemiological profile of various fetal abnormalities that have evoked requests for late termination of pregnancy in Mongolia. Materials and methods: This cross-sectional observational study was conducted in a cohort of 45,095 pregnancies. Of these, 156 were terminated because of fetal anomalies. Data pertaining to fetal/congenital anomalies were collected after informed consent from families and compared with 312 healthy controls to evaluate associated maternal risk factors. Results: In this cohort, 34.5 in 10,000 pregnancies were terminated because of fetal anomalies during the study period 2017–2019. A total of 156 terminations were related to congenital anomalies. Down syndrome (DS) was the most frequent reason (25%). The other leading reasons were multiple congenital anomalies (16%), cleft lip/palate (10.9%), and anomalies of the central nervous system (9.6%) or the musculoskeletal system (9.6%). Maternal age >35 years, higher education, less spacing between successive pregnancies, and previous history of abortion(s) were associated with a higher likelihood of birth defects. Conclusion: Down syndrome is the leading indication for late-stage TOPFAs in Mongolia. Multi-system congenital anomalies, clefts, and anomalies of the central nervous system and musculoskeletal system were other reasons that led to requests for termination of pregnancy.


PDF Share
  1. Zarocostas J. Serious birth defects kill at least three million children a year. BMJ 2006;332(7536):256. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.332.7536. 256-b.
  2. Walani SR, Biermann J. March of Dimes Foundation: Leading the way to birth defects prevention. Public Health Rev 2017;38:12. DOI: 10.1186/s40985-017-0058-3.
  3. Wang H, Bhutta ZA, Coates MM, et al. Global, regional, national, and selected subnational levels of stillbirths, neonatal, infant, and under-5 mortality, 1980–2015: A systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2015. Lancet 2016;388(10053):1725–1774. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31575-6.
  4. Kumar J, Saini SS, Sundaram V, et al. Prevalence & spectrum of congenital anomalies at a tertiary care centre in north India over 20 years (1998–2017). Indian J Med Res 2021;154(3):483–490. DOI: 10.4103/ijmr.IJMR_1414_19.
  5. Zahedi F, Tirgar S, Abarghoei NH, et al. Considering Islamic principles in ethical counseling for mothers of fetuses with congenital anomalies. IJMEHM 2015;7(5):1–16. Available from: http://ijme.tums.ac.ir/article-1-5472-en.html.
  6. El Koumi MA, Al Banna EA, Lebda I. Pattern of congenital anomalies in newborn: A hospital-based study. Pediatr Rep 2013;5(1):e5. DOI: 10.4081/pr.2013.e5.
  7. Secretariat WRbt. Birth defects. World Health Organization. 2023. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/birth-defects.
  8. National-Center-for-Health-Statistics. ICD-10, International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems. Tabular List, 2022. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; National Center for Health Statistics. 2024. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/manuals/2022/2e_volume1_2022.htm.
  9. Nikiema JN, Thiam D, Bayani A, et al. Assessing the impact of transitioning to 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) on comorbidity indices. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2024;31(6):1219–1226. DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocae046.
  10. WHO. International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD). World Health Organization. 2024. Available from: https://www.who.int/standards/classifications/classification-of-diseases.
  11. Ahmed W, Dey D, Farid R. Prevalence and pattern of congenital anomalies and its outcome at Chattagram Maa-O-Shishu General Hospital. Chattagram Maa-O-Shishu Hosp Med Coll J 2017;16(1):22–25. DOI: 10.3329/cmoshmcj.v16i1.34981.
  12. Jain SR, Naik JD, Dhakne BR, et al. Pattern of congenital malformations in newborn: A hospital-based study. International J Res Med Sci 2016;4(2):524–528.
  13. WHO. Prevention and Surveillance of Birth Defects: WHO Regional Office for South-East Asia. World-Health-Organization; 2015.
  14. Oyunchimeg O, Burmaa B, Enkhtuya T, et al. Newborns in Ulaanbaatar, results of studying the distribution and structure of middle birth defects. Mongolian Med Sci 2014;13(1):37–41. Available from: https://www.mongolmed.mn/uploads/editions/pdf/c2f788b56933596d26597ecba11b0429.pdf.
  15. Hulka JF. Evidence indicates congenital anomalies are main cause for spontaneous abortion. JAMA 1964;188(11):33. DOI: 10.1001/jama.1964.03060370105057.
  16. Mori R, Yonemoto N, Noma H, et al. The Maternal and Child Health (MCH) handbook in Mongolia: A cluster-randomized, controlled trial. PLoS One 2015;10(4):e0119772. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0119772.
  17. Heaney S, Tomlinson M, Aventin A. Termination of pregnancy for fetal anomaly: A systematic review of the healthcare experiences and needs of parents. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2022;22(1):441. DOI: 10.1186/s12884-022-04770-4.
  18. Anderson N, Boswell O, Duff G. Prenatal sonography for the detection of fetal anomalies: Results of a prospective study and comparison with prior series. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1995;165(4): 943–950. DOI: 10.2214/ajr.165.4.7676997.
  19. Tsogt B, Seded K, Johnson BR, Strategic Assessment T. Applying the WHO strategic approach to strengthening first and second trimester abortion services in Mongolia. Reprod Health Matters 2008;16(31 Suppl):127–134. DOI: 10.1016/S0968-8080(08)31383-4.
  20. Melo DG, Sanseverino MTV, Schmalfuss TO, et al. Why are birth defects surveillance programs important? Front Public Health 2021;9:753342. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.753342.
  21. Abebe S, Gebru G, Amenu D, et al. Risk factors associated with congenital anomalies among newborns in southwestern Ethiopia: A case-control study. PLoS One 2021;16(1):e0245915. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0245915.
  22. Mishra P, Pandey CM, Singh U, et al. Descriptive statistics and normality tests for statistical data. Ann Card Anaesth 2019;22(1):67–72. DOI: 10.4103/aca.ACA_157_18.
  23. Dettori JR, Norvell DC. The Anatomy of Data. Global Spine J 2018;8(3):311–313. DOI: 10.1177/2192568217746998.
  24. Mishra P, Singh U, Pandey CM, et al. Application of student's t-test, analysis of variance, and covariance. Ann Card Anaesth 2019;22(4):407–411. DOI: 10.4103/aca.ACA_94_19.
  25. Xu W, Zhao Y, Nian S, et al. Differential analysis of disease risk assessment using binary logistic regression with different analysis strategies. J Int Med Re 2018;46(9):3656–3664. DOI: 10.1177/0300060518777173.
  26. Altman DG, Bland JM. Parametric v non-parametric methods for data analysis. BMJ 2009;338:a3167. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.a3167.
  27. Kwak S. Are only p-values less than 0.05 significant? A p-value greater than 0.05 is also significant! J Lipid Atheroscler 2023;12(2):89–95. DOI: 10.12997/jla.2023.12.2.89.
  28. Goldfarb CA, Manske PR, Busa R, et al. Upper-extremity phocomelia reexamined: A longitudinal dysplasia. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005;87(12):2639–2648. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.D.02011.
  29. WHO. Congenital disorders. World Health Organization. 2024. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/birth-defects.
  30. Santoro M, Mezzasalma L, Coi A, et al. Sociodemographic differences in prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal anomalies: A population-based study. Front Pediatr 2021;9:630363. DOI: 10.3389/fped.2021.630363.
  31. Benedetto C, Borella F, Divakar H, et al. FIGO preconception checklist: Preconception care for mother and baby. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2024;165(1):1–8. DOI: 10.1002/ijgo.15446.
  32. Hanschmidt F, Treml J, Klingner J, et al. Stigma in the context of pregnancy termination after diagnosis of fetal anomaly: Associations with grief, trauma, and depression. Arch Womens Ment Health 2018;21(4):391–399. DOI: 10.1007/s00737-017-0807-9.
  33. Antonarakis SE, Skotko BG, Rafii MS, et al. Down syndrome. Nat Rev Dis Primers 2020;6(1):9. DOI: 10.1038/s41572-019-0143-7.
  34. Roizen NJ, Patterson D. Down's syndrome. Lancet 2003;361(9365): 1281–1289. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)12987-X.
  35. United Nations. World Down Syndrome Day 21 March. United Nations. 2024. Available from: https://www.un.org/en/observances/down-syndrome-day.
  36. Fiscella K, Franks P, Gold MR, et al. Inequality in quality: Addressing socioeconomic, racial, and ethnic disparities in health care. JAMA 2000;283(19):2579–2584. DOI: 10.1001/jama.283.19.2579.
  37. Varshney K, Iriowen R, Morrell K, et al. Disparities and outcomes of patients living with Down syndrome undergoing healthcare transitions from pediatric to adult care: A scoping review. Am J Med Genet A 2022;188(8):2293–2302. DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.a.62854.
  38. Aprigio J, de Castro CML, Lima MAC, et al. Mothers of children with Down syndrome: A clinical and epidemiological study. J Community Genet 2023;14(2):189–195. DOI: 10.1007/s12687-022-00627-7.
  39. Yoon PW, Freeman SB, Sherman SL, et al. Advanced maternal age and the risk of Down syndrome characterized by the meiotic stage of chromosomal error: A population-based study. Am J Hum Genet 1996;58(3):628–633. PMID: 8644722.
  40. Song Y, Jieping S, Tianshu Z, et al. Incidence of Down syndrome by maternal age in Chinese population. Front Genet 2022;13:980627. DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2022.980627.
  41. DiMaio MS, Baumgarten A, Greenstein RM, et al. Screening for fetal Down's syndrome in pregnancy by measuring maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein levels. N Engl J Med 1987;317(6):342–346. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM198708063170603.
  42. Hassold T, Sherman S. Down syndrome: Genetic recombination and the origin of the extra chromosome 21. Clin Genet 2000;57(2):95–100. DOI: 10.1034/j.1399-0004.2000.570201.x.
  43. Akhtar F, Bokhari SRA. Down Syndrome. StatPearls [Internet]. StatPearls Publishing; 2023. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK526016/.
  44. Asim A, Kumar A, Muthuswamy S, et al. J Biomed Sci 2015;22(1):41. DOI: 10.1186/s12929-015-0138-y.
  45. Antonarakis SE. Short arms of human acrocentric chromosomes and the completion of the human genome sequence. Genome Res 2022;32(4):599–607. DOI: 10.1101/gr.275350.121.
  46. Priest JH, Blackston RD, Pearse LA, et al. Molecular evidence for true isochromosome 21q. Hum Genet 1988;81(1):1–3. DOI: 10.1007/BF00283718.
  47. Hulten MA, Jonasson J, Nordgren A, et al. Germinal and somatic Trisomy 21 Mosaicism: How common is it, what are the implications for individual carriers and how does it come about? Curr Genomics 2010;11(6):409–419. DOI: 10.2174/138920210793176056.
  48. Maheshwari A, Singh S, Sharma V, et al. Many Term infants with persistent patency of the ductus arteriosus could be trisomy 21 mosaics. Newborn (Clarksville) 2024;3(1):61–64. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-11002-0090.
  49. Motta M, Singhal A, Hoyos AB, et al. Down Syndrome: Let's work together to end the stereotypes. Newborn (Clarksville) 2024;3(2): in press.
  50. Al-Nbaheen MS. Analysis of Downs syndrome with molecular techniques for future diagnoses. Saudi J Biol Sci 2018;25(3):558–562. DOI: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2016.01.044
  51. Turrens JF. Increased superoxide dismutase and Down's syndrome. Med Hypotheses 2001;56(6):617–619. DOI: 10.1054/mehy.2001. 1327.
  52. Tosh JL, Rhymes ER, Mumford P, et al. Genetic dissection of Down syndrome-associated alterations in APP/amyloid-beta biology using mouse models. Sci Rep 2021;11(1):5736. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-85062-3.
  53. Korenberg JR, Kawashima H, Pulst SM, et al. Molecular definition of a region of chromosome 21 that causes features of the Down syndrome phenotype. Am J Hum Genet 1990;47(2):236–246.
  54. Qi Q, Zhou X, Jiang Y, et al. A rare de novo duplication of chromosome 21q22.12 --> q22.3 with other concomitant deletion and duplication of small fragments in 21q associated with Down syndrome: Prenatal diagnosis, molecular cytogenetic characterization. Mol Cytogenet 2013;6(1):11. DOI: 10.1186/1755-8166-6-11.
  55. Patterson D. Genetic mechanisms involved in the phenotype of Down syndrome. Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev 2007;13(3):199–206. DOI: 10.1002/mrdd.20162.
  56. Karmiloff-Smith A, Al-Janabi T, D’Souza H, et al. The importance of understanding individual differences in Down syndrome. F1000Res 2016;5. DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.7506.1.
  57. International DS. 13th World Down Syndrome Day Conference. Down Syndrome International. 2024. Available from: https://events.ds-int.org/13thWorldDownSyndromeDayConference.
  58. WHO Mortality Statistics. World Health Organization. 2024. Available from: http://apps.who.int/healthinfo/statistics/mortality/who.
  59. Network E. EUROCAT network. European Commission's Joint Research Centre. 2024. Available from: https://eu-rd-platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/eurocat/eurocat-network/eurocat-network-overview_en.
  60. Kinsner-Ovaskainen A, Perraud A, Lanzoni M, et al. European Monitoring of Congenital Anomalies: JRC-EUROCAT Report on Statistical Monitoring of Congenital Anomalies (2009–2018). Joint Research Centre. 2024. Available from: https://eu-rd-platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/system/files/public/EUROCAT-Statistical-Monitoring-Report-2021.pdf.
  61. Boyle B, Addor MC, Arriola L, et al. Estimating global burden of disease due to congenital anomaly: An analysis of European data. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2018;103(1):F22–F28. DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2016-311845.
  62. Liu L, Johnson HL, Cousens S, et al. Global, regional, and national causes of child mortality: An updated systematic analysis for 2010 with time trends since 2000. Lancet 2012;379(9832):2151–2161. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60560-1.
  63. Lozano R, Naghavi M, Foreman K, et al. Global and regional mortality from 235 causes of death for 20 age groups in 1990 and 2010: A systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2010. Lancet 2012;380(9859):2095–2128. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61728-0.
  64. Dasari P, Aggarwal P. Prenatal diagnosis of congenital fetal malformations medically terminated: A retrospective analysis. Hindu 2021;232:94–93. DOI: 10.21276/obgyn.2021.8.1.13.
  65. Sarkar S, Patra C, Dasgupta MK, et al. Prevalence of congenital anomalies in neonates and associated risk factors in a tertiary care hospital in eastern India. J Clin Neonatol 2013;2(3):131–134. DOI: 10.4103/2249-4847.119998.
  66. Alam MZ, Tareq MR, Shapna DS, et al. Epidemiological study of congenital anomalies and risk factors in newborn infants at a tertiary care hospital in Bangladesh. Newborn (Clarksville) 2023;2(3):185–190. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-11002-0071.
  67. Bashir A. Congenital malformations: Prenatal diagnosis and management. Am J Biomed Sci Res 2019;2(1):24–27. DOI: 10.34297/AJBSR.2019.02.000565.
  68. Al-Dewik N, Samara M, Younes S, et al. Prevalence, predictors, and outcomes of major congenital anomalies: A population-based register study. Sci Rep 2023;13(1):2198. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-27935-3.
  69. O'Donoghue K. Interim Clinical Guidance, Pathway for management of fatal fetal anomalies and/or life-limiting conditions during pregnancy: termination of pregnancy. Institute of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. 2024. Available from: https://rcpi-live-cdn.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/IOG-TOPFA-PATHWAY-FINAL-180119.pdf.
  70. ACOG. Increasing Access to Abortion: Committee Opinion, Number 815. American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists. 2024. Available from: https://www.acog.org/clinical/clinical-guidance/committee-opinion/articles/2020/12/increasing-access-to-abortion.
  71. Public-Policy-Office. State Laws and Policies: Abortion Bans in Cases of Sex or Race Selection or Genetic Anomaly Guttmacher Institute. 2024. Available from: https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/abortion-bans-cases-sex-or-race-selection-or-genetic-anomaly.
  72. WHO. Global Abortion Policies Database. World Health Organization. 2024. Available from: https://abortion-policies.srhr.org/country/mongolia/.
  73. Tomek V, Jicinska H, Pavlicek J, et al. Pregnancy termination and postnatal major congenital heart defect prevalence after introduction of prenatal cardiac screening. JAMA Netw Open 2023;6(9):e2334069. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.34069.
  74. Jones K, Baird K, Fenwick J. Women's experiences of labour and birth when having a termination of pregnancy for fetal abnormality in the second trimester of pregnancy: A qualitative meta-synthesis. Midwifery 2017;50:42–54. DOI: 10.1016/j.midw.2017.03.014.
  75. Shetty N, Mantri S, Agarwal S, et al. Unraveling the challenges: A critical review of congenital malformations in low socioeconomic strata of developing countries. Cureus 2023;15(7):e41800. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.41800.
  76. Shahat ARS, Greco G. The economic costs of childhood disability: A literature review. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2021;18(7).3532. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18073531.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.