Interpregnancy interval and birth defects

Short interbirth interval and adverse pregnancy outcomes: a Bayesian network approach

Background

Interbirth interval (IBI), the time between consecutive births, has been tied to perinatal outcomes.

Objective

To analyze adverse perinatal events following short IBI in a large South American sample.

Study design

Observational, retrospective, hospital-based study including malformed and nonmalformed live- and stillbirths. Outcomes were preterm birth (PTB), low birth weight (LBW), and specific birth defects. Logistic regressions were used to evaluate the risk of selected variables for short IBI and for adverse outcomes after short IBI, adjusting by confounders. Bayesian networks exhibited relationships among short IBI, outcomes, and variables.

Results

Short IBI rate was 2%-3%. Maternal age and a previous abortion were the main confounders. A significant high risk for short IBI was found in mothers ≤19 years while mothers ≥30 were at low risk, mediated by a previous abortion. The risk of short IBI, adjusted by confounders, was significant for LBW but not for PTB. An unadjusted risk of short IBI was observed for gastroschisis, which disappeared after adjusting for confounders. Maternal age ≤19 and previous abortion were directly related with gastroschisis; the relationship between gastroschisis and short IBI occurred through any of these two variables. A direct relationship between gastroschisis and maternal age ≥30 was observed.

Conclusions

Only young mothers were directly related with short IBI. In older mothers, a short IBI mainly occurred after a previous abortion. Short IBI was a risk factor only for LBW. The PTB and gastroschisis relationship with short IBI was indirect, mediated by young maternal age and/or a previous abortion.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the association between young maternal age and fetal abnormalities

Fetal anomalies among young women and adolescents pose major public health concerns. This systematic review aims to elucidate the relationship between young maternal age and the incidence of fetal abnormalities. According to the systematic review and meta-analysis PRISMA protocol, cohort, cross-sectional and case-control studies were scrutinized to include 80,393,450 participants across diverse regions. The meta-analysis utilized Odds Ratios (OR) as the effect measure, adopting a random-effects model. The screening process involved 157 selected and verified manuscripts, which ultimately resulted in the final inclusion of 20 studied in the meta-analysis. The criterion for young maternal age was the age of ≤ 20 years. The meta-analysis revealed a pooled OR of 0.93 (95% CI: 0.82-1.05, p = 0.252), indicating no statistically significant association between young maternal age (≤ 20 years) and fetal anomalies. However, considerable heterogeneity (I² = 96.21%) was noted, prompting the use of a random-effects model to derive the reported results. The meta-analysis did not find statistically significant differences in the occurrence of congenital anomalies in fetuses of younger women than in overall population. Although due to significant heterogeneity of the analyzed studies, and a risk of bias, caution should be exercised when interpreting the results, further investigation may be warranted to understand the relationship between maternal age and risk of fetal anomalies. Nevertheless, the study shows significant differences, which diminish in collective analysis, suggests that factors beyond age may be influential. Specifically, the limited access to or quality of healthcare in certain regions could be a more critical factor than maternal age itself.

Birth spacing and risk of adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes: A systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The association between extreme birth spacing and adverse outcomes is controversial, and available evidence is fragmented into different classifications of birth spacing.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of observational studies to evaluate the association between birth spacing (i.e., interpregnancy interval and interoutcome interval) and adverse outcomes (i.e., pregnancy complications, adverse birth outcomes). Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a random-effects model, and the dose-response relationships were evaluated using generalized least squares trend estimation.

RESULTS

A total of 129 studies involving 46 874 843 pregnancies were included. In the general population, compared with an interpregnancy interval of 18-23 months, extreme intervals (<6 months and ≥ 60 months) were associated with an increased risk of adverse outcomes, including preterm birth, small for gestational age, low birthweight, fetal death, birth defects, early neonatal death, and premature rupture of fetal membranes (pooled OR range: 1.08-1.56; p < 0.05). The dose-response analyses further confirmed these J-shaped relationships (pnon-linear  < 0.001-0.009). Long interpregnancy interval was only associated with an increased risk of preeclampsia and gestational diabetes (pnon-linear  < 0.005 and pnon-linear  < 0.001, respectively). Similar associations were observed between interoutcome interval and risk of low birthweight and preterm birth (pnon-linear  < 0.001). Moreover, interoutcome interval of ≥60 months was associated with an increased risk of cesarean delivery (pooled OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.04-2.83). For pregnancies following preterm births, an interpregnancy interval of 9 months was not associated with an increased risk of preterm birth, according to dose-response analyses (pnon-linear  = 0.008). Based on limited evidence, we did not observe significant associations between interpregnancy interval or interoutcome interval after pregnancy losses and risk of small for gestational age, fetal death, miscarriage, or preeclampsia (pooled OR range: 0.76-1.21; p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Extreme birth spacing has extensive adverse effects on maternal and infant health. In the general population, interpregnancy interval of 18-23 months may be associated with potential benefits for both mothers and infants. For women with previous preterm birth, the optimal birth spacing may be 9 months.

Short interpregnancy interval can lead to adverse pregnancy outcomes: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The evidence of some previous papers was insufficient in studying the causal association between interpregnancy interval (IPI) and adverse pregnancy outcomes. In addition, more literature have been updated worldwide during the last 10 years.

METHODS

English and Chinese articles published from January 1980 to August 2021 in the databases of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Ovid, Embase, China Biology Medicine disc (CBM), and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) were searched. Then following the inclusion and exclusion criteria, we screened the articles. Utilizing the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS), we evaluated the quality of the included articles. The literature information extraction table was set up in Excel, and the meta-analysis was performed with Stata 16.0 software (Texas, USA).

RESULTS

A total of 41 articles were included in the meta-analysis, and NOS scores were four to eight. The short IPI after delivery was the risk factor of preterm birth (pooled odds ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.42-1.57), very preterm birth (pooled OR: 1.82, 95% CI: 1.55-2.14), low birth weight (pooled OR: 1.33, 95% CI: 1.24-1.43), and small for gestational age (pooled OR: 1.14, 95% CI: 1.07-1.21), offspring death (pooled OR: 1.60, 95% CI: 1.51-1.69), NICU (pooled OR: 1.26, 95% CI: 1.01-1.57), and congenital abnormality (pooled OR: 1.10, 95% CI: 1.05-1.16), while was not the risk factor of gestational hypertension (pooled OR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.93-0.98) or gestational diabetes (pooled OR: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.93-1.20).

CONCLUSION

Short IPI (IPI < 6 months) can lead to adverse perinatal outcomes, while it is not a risk factor for gestational diabetes and gestational hypertension. Therefore, more high-quality studies covering more comprehensive indicators of maternal and perinatal pregnancy outcomes are needed to ameliorate the pregnancy policy for women of childbearing age.

Congenital anomalies and maternal age: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

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.

Interpregnancy interval and subsequent perinatal risk of congenital heart disease in Guangzhou, Southern China: a retrospective cohort study, 2014-2019

BACKGROUND

The association between maternal interpregnancy interval (IPI) and congenital heart disease (CHD) in neonates remains inconclusive. This study aimed to examine the effect of maternal IPI on birth risk of CHD.

METHODS

Chinese women with two consecutive singleton deliveries in Guangzhou between January 2014 and December 2019 were selected as participants. Information on IPI and CHD was extracted from the Guangzhou Perinatal Health Care and Delivery Registry and the Guangzhou Birth Defects Surveillance Program. We stratified IPI into four categories: <24 months, 24-35 months, 36-59 months, and ≥60 months. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to examine the association between IPI and CHD. Subgroup analysis was also performed to assess whether the associations differed across top three CHD subtypes.

RESULTS

For 119,510 women enrolled in this study, the mean ages at two consecutive deliveries were 26.2 ± 3.8 and 28.8 ± 4.0 years, which yielded a median IPI of 51.2 (interquartile range, 32.1-77.2) months. Among them, 828 delivered infants with CHD during their second pregnancy. There was a J-shaped curve relationship between IPI and CHD with the lowest birth prevalence (5.33‰) at 24-35-month interval. Compared to women with an IPI of 24-35 months, those with an IPI ≥60 had an increased risk of delivering infants with CHD (adjusted odds ratio (OR), 1.41; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.19-1.64). However, for those with an IPI <24 months (adjusted OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.97-1.51), IPI was statistically insignificant associated with the risk of delivering infants with CHD (p = .12). There were different patterns of associations for different CHD subtypes.

CONCLUSIONS

Longer maternal IPI (≥60 months) was associated with an increased risk of delivering infants with CHD in the Chinese population.

Interpregnancy interval and prevalence of selected birth defects: A multistate study

BACKGROUND

Both short and long interpregnancy intervals (IPIs) have been associated with adverse birth outcomes. We undertook a multistate study to describe the prevalence of selected birth defects by IPI.

METHODS

We obtained data from nine population-based state birth defects registries for singleton live births in 2000-2009 among mothers with a previous live birth identified through birth certificates. IPI was calculated as the difference between prior birthdate and start of the current pregnancy (conception date). We estimated prevalence of selected defects per 10,000 live births and prevalence ratios (PRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) overall and stratified by maternal age at previous birth and race/ethnicity. Primary analyses focused on short IPI < 6 months and long IPI ≥ 60 months compared to 18-23 months (referent). Sensitivity analyses limited to active-surveillance states and those with<10% missing IPI.

RESULTS

Among 5,147,962 eligible births, 6.3% had short IPI while 19.8% had long IPI. Compared to referent, prevalence with short IPI was elevated for gastroschisis (3.7, CI: 3.0-4.5 vs. 2.0, CI: 1.6-2.4) and with both short and long IPI for tetralogy of Fallot (short: 3.4, 2.8-4.2 long: 3.8, 3.4-4.3 vs. 2.7, 2.3-3.2) and cleft lip ± palate (short: 9.9, 8.8-11.2 long: 9.2, 8.5-9.8 vs. 8.4, 7.6-9.2). Stratified analyses identified additional associations, including elevated prevalence of anencephaly with short IPI in younger mothers and limb defects with long IPI in those ages 25-34 at prior birth. Sensitivity analyses showed similar results.

CONCLUSION

In this population-based study, we observed increased prevalence of several birth defects with short and long IPI.

Short interpregnancy intervals and risks for birth defects: support for the nutritional depletion hypothesis

BACKGROUND

Research suggests short interpregnancy intervals increase risks for adverse perinatal outcomes, including some birth defects. A hypothesized cause is nutritional depletion, including folic acid (FA).

OBJECTIVES

We evaluated associations between short interpregnancy intervals, alone and in combination with FA intake, and the occurrence of select malformations.

METHODS

Data were from the National Birth Defects Prevention Study (US case-control, 1997-2011). Participants included multiparous women whose prior pregnancy resulted in live birth. Cases included 8 noncardiac and 6 cardiac defect groups (n = 3219); controls were nonmalformed live-borns (n = 2508). We categorized interpregnancy interval (<6, 6-11, 12-17, and 18-23 mo) and periconceptional FA intake [no FA supplement use and dietary folate equivalents (DFE) <400 µg/d, no FA supplement use and DFE ≥400 µg/d, or any FA supplement use]. We controlled for age, race/ethnicity, income, pregnancy intention, and study center. ORs <0.8 or >1.2 were considered to represent potentially meaningful associations.

RESULTS

ORs for <6 compared with 18-23 mo were >1.2 for 4/8 noncardiac and 3/6 cardiac malformations. Among participants with any FA supplement use, ORs comparing <6 with 6-23 mo were <1.2 for most defects. Conversely, most ORs were >1.2 for <6 mo + no FA supplement use and DFE <400 µg/d compared with 6-23 mo + any FA supplement use. Magnitude and precision varied by defect.

CONCLUSIONS

Short interpregnancy intervals were associated with a trend of higher risks for several defects, notably in the absence of FA supplement use. To our knowledge, our study is the first to provide preliminary empirical support that these etiologies may be related to shorter interpregnancy intervals and possible nutritional deficiencies. Because FA intake is highly correlated with other nutrients, and because our estimates were generally imprecise, more research with larger sample sizes is needed to better understand the role of FA compared with other nutrients in each defect-specific etiology.

Short interpregnancy intervals and adverse perinatal outcomes in high-resource settings: An updated systematic review

BACKGROUND

This systematic review summarises association between short interpregnancy intervals and adverse perinatal health outcomes in high-resource settings to inform recommendations for healthy birth spacing for the United States.

METHODS

Five databases and a previous systematic review were searched for relevant articles published between 1966 and 1 May 2017. We included studies meeting the following criteria: (a) reporting of perinatal health outcomes after a short interpregnancy interval since last livebirth; (b) conducted within a high-resource setting; and (c) estimates were adjusted for maternal age and at least one socio-economic factor.

RESULTS

Nine good-quality and 18 fair-quality studies were identified. Interpregnancy intervals <6 months were associated with a clinically and statistically significant increased risk of adverse outcomes in studies of preterm birth (eg, aOR ≥ 1.20 in 10 of 14 studies); spontaneous preterm birth (eg, aOR ≥ 1.20 in one of two studies); small-for-gestational age (eg, aOR ≥ 1.20 in 5 of 11 studies); and infant mortality (eg, aOR ≥ 1.20 in four of four studies), while four studies of perinatal death showed no association. Interpregnancy intervals of 6-11 and 12-17 months generally had smaller point estimates and confidence intervals that included the null. Most studies were population-based and few included adjustment for detailed measures of key confounders.

CONCLUSIONS

In high-resource settings, there is some evidence showing interpregnancy intervals <6 months since last livebirth are associated with increased risks for preterm birth, small-for-gestational age and infant death; however, results were inconsistent. Additional research controlling for confounding would further inform recommendations for healthy birth spacing for the United States.

The Role of Extremes in Interpregnancy Interval in Women at Increased Risk for Adverse Obstetric Outcomes Due to Health Disparities: A Literature Review

Background:

The interpregnancy interval (IPI) defines the time between two consecutive gestations. In the general population, women with IPIs that fall outside the recommended 18-24 month range appear to be at modestly increased risk for adverse obstetric outcomes.

Objective:

The aim of this review was to assess the impact of extremes in IPI in populations with an increased baseline risk for adverse obstetric outcomes due to disparities in health and health care, including racial and ethnic groups, adolescents, and those of lower socioeconomic status.

Methods:

We conducted a MEDLINE/Pubmed literature search in February 2016. Identified articles were reviewed and assigned a level of evidence.

Results:

The 24 studies included in our final review were mainly retrospective with considerable heterogeneity in definitions and outcomes that prevented a quantitative meta-analysis.

Conclusion:

The results of our review suggest that at-risk populations may have an increased frequency of shortened IPIs though the impact appears to be moderate and inconsistent. There was insufficient evidence to draw meaningful conclusions regarding a prolonged IPI or the effect of interventions. Based on the current literature, under-served populations are more likely to have a shortened IPI which increased the incidence of prematurity and low birth weight in some groups though the effect on additional obstetric outcomes is difficult to assess

An epigenetic association of malformations, adverse reproductive outcomes, and fetal origins hypothesis related effects

VACTERL, the prototype for associated congenital anomalies, also has connections with functional issues such as pregnancy losses, prematurity, growth delays, perinatal difficulties, and parental subfertility. This segues into a broader association with similar connections even in the absence of malformations. DNA methylation disturbances in the ovum are a likely cause, with epigenetic links to individual components and to folate effects before conception, explaining diverse fetal and placental findings and providing a link to fetal origin hypothesis-related effects. The association encompasses the following: (1) Pre- and periconceptual effects, with frequent fertility issues and occasional imprinting disorders. (2) Early malformations. (3) Adverse pregnancy outcomes (APOs), as above. (4) Developmental destabilization that resolves soon after birth. This potentiates other causes of association findings, introducing multiple confounders. (5) Long-term fetal origins hypothesis-related risks. The other findings are exceptional when the same malformations have Mendelian origins, supporting a distinct pathogenesis. Expressions are facilitated by one-carbon metabolic issues, maternal and fetal stress, and decreased embryo size. This may be one of the commonest causes of adverse reproductive outcomes, but multifactorial findings, variable onsets and phenotypes, and interactions with multiple confounders make recognition difficult. This association supports VACTERL as a continuum that includes isolated malformations, extends the fetal origins hypothesis, explains adverse effects linked to maternal obesity, and suggests possible interventions.

Interpregnancy Interval and Congenital Anomalies: A Record-Linkage Study Using the Manitoba Population Research Data Repository

OBJECTIVE

Congenital anomalies are a serious public health issue, and relatively few modifiable risk factors have been identified. Our objective was to investigate one such potential risk factor, the interpregnancy interval (IPI).

METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis of data housed at the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy. In-hospital live births and stillbirths of at least 20 weeks' gestation were identified, and consecutive births to the same mother were grouped into sibling pairs to calculate the IPI for the younger siblings of each pair. Logistic regression models were fit to examine the association between the IPI and any congenital anomaly, as well as CNS and chromosomal anomalies, while controlling for potentially confounding sociodemographic and clinical factors.

RESULTS

Among 172 909 live births and stillbirths, the IPI was not significantly associated with congenital anomalies overall or with chromosomal anomalies. Short IPIs were associated with significantly increased odds of CNS anomalies relative to IPIs of 18-23 months (adjusted OR [aOR] for IPIs <6 months 2.15; 95% CI 1.48-3.12), whereas the aOR for IPIs ≥60 months was elevated but not statistically significant (aOR 1.50; 95% CI 0.96-2.34). In a sensitivity analysis in which the cohort was restricted to births from 2003 onwards (which yielded more complete data on health-related behaviours), the observed effect for IPIs shorter than 6 months and CNS anomalies was attenuated and no longer significant, but it remained elevated (aOR 1.65; 95% CI 0.85-3.24).

CONCLUSION

The findings for CNS anomalies warrant further investigation.