Donald School Journal of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology

Register      Login

VOLUME 15 , ISSUE 4 ( October-December, 2021 ) > List of Articles

Original Scientific Paper

Prenatal Sonographic Diagnosis of Musculoskeletal Anomalies in South Western Nigeria: A Hospital-based Study

Janet A Akinmoladun

Keywords : Congenital anomalies, Fetus, Musculoskeletal, Prenatal diagnosis, Ultrasound

Citation Information : Akinmoladun JA. Prenatal Sonographic Diagnosis of Musculoskeletal Anomalies in South Western Nigeria: A Hospital-based Study. Donald School J Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2021; 15 (4):401-406.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10009-1824

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 31-12-2021

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2021; The Author(s).


Abstract

Introduction: Musculoskeletal anomalies are the second most common anomalies after anomalies of the central nervous system. The presence of these anomalies in children can cause emotional upset and social stigma to the affected parents. Early detection of these anomalies is important in the management of the condition and may help to reduce perinatal morbidity and mortality associated with them. The objective of this study is to describe the musculoskeletal anomalies diagnosed during prenatal ultrasound screening for anomalies in our center, the associated anomalies and outcomes. Materials and methods: This is a retrospective evaluation of all cases of musculoskeletal anomalies detected during prenatal ultrasound screening for fetal anomalies at the University College Hospital, Ibadan, Nigeria between 2012 and 2018. Results: Two thousand six hundred and thirty-four (2,634) fetuses were screened prenatally with ultrasound for anomalies over a 6-year period. A total of 14 (0.4%) of the fetuses had musculoskeletal anomalies. Four (28.6%) of the anomalies were isolated while the remaining had associated anomalies involving other systems. Seven (50.0%) of the pregnancies with these anomalies were terminated before term because of the severity and/or associated anomalies. Six (42.9%) of the fetuses were delivered at term of which three had early neonatal death. Conclusion: Prenatal screening for anomalies affecting the musculoskeletal system is essential in the primary prevention of disability and reducing perinatal mortality and morbidity.


PDF Share
  1. National Birth Defects Prevention Network. (2004). National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities Guidelines for Conducting Birth Defects Surveillance. [online] Available from: http://www.nbdpn.org/birth_defects_surveillance_gui.php. [Last accessed October, 2021].
  2. Akinmoladun JA, Ogbole GI, Lawal TA, et al. Routine prenatal ultrasound anomaly screening program in a Nigerian university hospital: Redefining obstetrics practice in a developing African country. Niger Med J 2015;56:263–269 DOI: 10.4103/0300-1652.169705
  3. Salomon IJ, Alfirevic Z, Berghella V, et al. Practice guidelines for performance of the routine mid-trimester fetal ultrasound scan. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011;37(1):116–126. DOI: 10.1002/uog.8831
  4. World Health Organization. (2013). Birth Defects in South-east Asia. A Public Health Challenge.[online] Available from https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/204821. [Last accessed October, 2021].
  5. WHO. Congenital anomalies, fact sheet. Geneva: WHO; 2015.
  6. Swain S, Agrawal A, Bhatia BD. Congenital malformations at birth. Indian Pediatr 1994;31:1187–1191. PMID: 7875778
  7. Mishra PC, Baveja R. Congenital malformations in the newborn: A prospective study. Indian Pediatr 1989;26:32–35. PMID: 2788132
  8. Agrawal D, Mohanty BB, Sarangi R, et al. Study of incidence and prevalence of musculoskeletal anomalies in a tertiary care hospital of eastern India. J Clin Diagn Res 2014;8(5)AC04-AC06. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2014/7882.4380
  9. Kumari OM, Singh V. Prevalence and pattern of congenital musculoskeletal anomalies: a single centre study. J Clin Diag Res 2018;12(1)QC16-QC19. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2018/31651.11111
  10. Froster UG, Baird PA. Maternal factors, medications, and drug exposure in congenital limb reduction defects. Environ Health Perspect 1993;101(Suppl3):269-274. DOI: 10.1289/ehp.93101s3269
  11. Holmes LB. Teratogen-induced limb defects. Am J Med Genet 2002;112(3):297–303. DOI:10.1002/ajmg.10781
  12. Shylaja DK, Menasinkai SB, Ramesh BR. Study of incidence of congenital musculoskeletal malformations and its relation to maternal age, parity and birth weight of the newborn. Indian J Clin Anat Physiol 2017;4(4):546–551. DOI: 10.18231/2394-2126.2017.0135
  13. Keret D, Bronshtein M, Wientroub S. Prenatal diagnosis of musculoskeletal anomalies. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005;434:8–15 DOI:10.1097/00003086-200505000-00003
  14. Noel A, Brown RN. Advances in evaluating the fetal skeleton. Int J Womens Health 2014;6:489–500 DOI: 10.2147/IJWH.S47073
  15. Khalil A, Pajkrt E, Chitty LS. Early prenatal diagnosis of skeletal anomalies. Prenat Diagn 2011;31(1):115–124. DOI:10.1002/pd.2676
  16. Krakow D, Lachman RS, Rimoin DL. Guidelines for the prenatal diagnosis of fetal skeletal dysplasias. Genet Med 2009;11(2):127–133. DOI: 10.1097/GIM.0b013e3181971ccb
  17. Prashar N, Kalsi M, Gupta S, et al. Pattern of congenital anomalies of musculoskeletal system in newborns: a hospital based study. IOSR J Dent Med Sci 2016;15(5 ver II):56-59. DOI: 10.9790/0853-1505025659
  18. Nelson DB, Dashe JS, McIntire DD, et al. Fetal skeletal dysplasias: sonographic indices associated with adverse outcomes. J Ultrasound Med 2014;33:1085–1090 DOI: 10.7863/ultra.33.6.1085
  19. Tayebi N, Yazdani K, Naghshin N. The prevalence of congenital malformations and its correlation with consanguineous marriages. Oman Med J 2010;25(1):37–40. DOI: 10.5001/omj.2010.9
  20. Gupta RK, Gupta CR, Singh D. Incidence of congenital malformations of the musculoskeletal system in new live borns in Jammu. JK Science 2003;5(4):157–160. ID: sea-171055
  21. Oyinbo CA, Dare NW, Amain ED. Prevalence of polydactyly, syndactyly, amniotic band syndrome, cleft lip, cleft palate and talipes equinovarus in Bayelsa state, Nigeria. GMS Med Inform Biom Epidemiol 2009;5(2):14. ISSN 1860-9171
  22. Mohammed YA, Shawky MR, Soliman AS, et al. Chromosomal study in newborn infants with congenital anomalies in Assiut University Hospital: Cross-sectional study. Egyptian J Med Hum Genet 2011;12(1):79–90. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmhg.2011.02.003
  23. Bakare T, Sowande OA, Adejuyigbe OO, et al. Epidemiology of external birth defects in neonates in South Western Nigeria. Afr J Paediatr Surg 2009;6(1):28–30. DOI: 10.4103/0189-6725.48572
  24. Simpkiss M, Lowe A. Congenital abnormalities in the African newborn. Arch Dis Med 1968;22:404–406 DOI: 10.1136/adc.36.188.404
  25. Vasluian E, van der Sluis CK, van Essen AJ, et al. Birth prevalence for congenital limb defects in the northern Netherlands: a 30-year population-based study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2013;14:323–336 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-14-323
  26. Mammen L, Benson CB. Outcome of fetuses with clubfeet diagnosed by prenatal sonography. J Ultrasound Med 2004;23:497–500. DOI: 10.7863/jum.2004.23.4.497
  27. Taksande A, Vilhekar K, Chaturvedi P, et al. Congenital malformations at birth in Central India: A rural medical college hospital based data. Indian J Hum Genet. 2010;16(3):159–163. DOI: 10.7863/jum.2004.23.4.497
  28. Shawky RM, Sadik DI. Congenital malformations prevalent among Egyptian children and associated risk factors. Egyptian J Med Hum Genet 2011;12:69–78. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmhg
  29. Mahela S, Talukdar B. Prevalence of congenital abnormalities on routine ultrasound scan of second and third trimester pregnancy. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol 2016;5:182–185. DOI: 10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20151621
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.