Lethality of Birth Defects in Live Born Infants Categorized by Gestational Age and Birth Weight

The causal relationship between COVID-19 and ten esophageal diseases: a study utilizing Mendelian randomization

Background

Clinical signs of dysphagia, pancreatic achalasia, and esophagitis have been reported in patients with COVID-19. However, the causal relationship between COVID-19 and esophageal diseases is not clear. Therefore, we utilized Mendelian randomization to explore the potential association between COVID-19 and esophageal diseases.

Methods

The summary statistics for a Genome-wide association study (GWAS) were obtained from The COVID-19 Host Genetics Initiative, encompassing four types of COVID-19 as exposure: severe COVID-19, hospitalized COVID-19 versus ambulatory COVID-19, hospitalized COVID-19 versus uninfected, and confirmed COVID-19. Additionally, summary statistics for ten esophageal diseases as outcomes were sourced from the GWAS Catalog and FinnGen databases. Univariate Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis was utilized to thoroughly investigate and validate the potential causal association between COVID-19 and various esophageal conditions, including esophageal varices, Barrett's esophagus, esophagitis, esophageal obstruction, esophageal ulcer, esophageal perforation, gastroesophageal reflux, congenital esophageal malformations, benign esophageal tumors, and esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Results

An inverse variance-weighted (IVW) model was utilized for univariate Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis, which revealed that genetic liability in patients with confirmed COVID-19 was associated with esophageal obstruction (OR [95% CI]: 0.5275458 [0.2822400-0.9860563]; p-value = 0.0450699). Furthermore, a suggestive causal association was found between genetic liability and a reduced risk of benign esophageal tumors (OR [95% CI]: 0.2715453 [0.09368493-0.7870724]; p-value = 0.0163510), but with a suggestively increased risk of congenital esophageal malformations (OR [95% CI]: 6.959561 [1.1955828-40.51204]; p-value = 0.03086835). Additionally, genetic liability in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, compared to non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients, was suggestively associated with an increased risk of esophagitis (OR [95% CI]: 1.443859 [1.0890568-1.914252]; p-value = 0.01068201). The reliability of these causal findings is supported by Cochran's Q statistic and the MR-Egger intercept test.

Conclusion

The results of this study suggest the existence of a causal relationship between COVID-19 and esophageal diseases, highlighting differing risk effects of COVID-19 on distinct esophageal conditions.

The global birth prevalence of clubfoot: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Estimates of the birth prevalence of clubfoot in low and middle income settings range from 0.5 to 2 per 1000 births. However, there is currently no estimate of global birth prevalence of clubfoot.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of studies reporting the birth prevalence of clubfoot across all countries and regions worldwide in the last 10 years. Africa Wide Information, EMBASE, CINAHL, Global Health, LILACS and Medline databases were searched for relevant studies from January 1st 2012 to February 9th 2023. Pooled prevalence estimates were calculated using the inverse variance method, and a random effects model was applied to account for heterogeneity between studies. Quality appraisal was performed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for Cohort studies. This review was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42023398410.

Findings

The search generated 757 studies. Thirty-five studies from 36 countries and five WHO regions were included. The pooled prevalence of clubfoot was 1.18 per 1000 births (95% CI: 1.00-1.36) based on data from 44,818,965 births. The highest prevalence rates were observed in low- and middle-income countries, particularly in the South-East Asia Region (1.80, 95% CI: 1.32-2.28) and the Africa Region (1.31, 95% CI: 0.86-1.77). We estimate that 176,476 (95% CI: 126,126-227,010) children will be born with clubfoot globally each year.

Interpretation

This study provides a comprehensive estimate of the global prevalence of clubfoot and highlights the significant burden of this condition, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. The findings underscore the need for improving access to effective treatment and prevention strategies in resource-limited settings.

Funding

SR received funds from the Global Clubfoot Initiative and the Rhodes Trust.

Predictors of length of stay for simple gastroschisis: analysis of ACS NSQIP-P database

PURPOSE

We aimed to assess predictors of length of stay for simple gastroschisis utilizing the NSQIP-Pediatric Database.

METHODS

The NSQIP-P Participant Use Data File was queried to identify patients with simple gastroschisis. We defined short length of stay (LOS) as patients discharged home ≤ 30 days from birth. We compared patients with short LOS versus prolonged LOS > 30 days. Predictors and outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

There were 888 patients with simple gastroschisis identified. Half of patients had LOS ≤ 30 days. Patients with LOS ≤ 30 were younger at repair (median age 1 day vs. 3 days, p = 0.0001), had higher birth weight (median 2.5 kg vs. 2.4 kg, p = 0.0001), and were less premature (37 week vs. 36 weeks, p = 0.0001). However, only gestational age and weight at birth were significant predictors of LOS on multivariate analysis (p = 0.0001). Prolonged LOS patients had more instances of ventilation, oxygen supplementation, sepsis (n = 2/446 or 0.4% vs. n = 9/442 or 2%, p = 0.003), bleeding/transfusion (n = 7/446 or 1.6% vs. n = 43/442 or 9.7%, p = 0.0001), line infections (n = 1/446 or 0.2% vs. n = 12/442, p = 0.001), and reoperations (n = 9/446 or 2% vs. n = 26/442 or 5.9%, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

Prematurity and birth weight are significant predictors of length of stay in simple gastroschisis patients. Prenatal counseling should continue to be one of the main factors to improve the outcomes for patients with gastroschisis. Type of study Retrospective cohort study. Level of evidence Level IV.