Ambient Air Pollution and Risk of Congenital Anomalies: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Objective We systematically reviewed epidemiologic studies on ambient air pollution and congenital anomalies and conducted meta-analyses for a number of air pollutant–anomaly combinations. Data sources and extraction From bibliographic searches we extracted 10 original epidemiologic studies that examined the association between congenital anomaly risk and concentrations of air pollutants. Meta-analyses were conducted if at least four studies published risk estimates for the same pollutant and anomaly group. Summary risk estimates were calculated for a) risk at high versus low exposure level in each study and b) risk per unit increase in continuous pollutant concentration. Data synthesis Each individual study reported statistically significantly increased risks for some combinations of air pollutants and congenital anomalies, among many combinations tested. In meta-analyses, nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) exposures were related to increases in risk of coarctation of the aorta [odds ratio (OR) per 10 ppb NO2 = 1.17; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.00–1.36; OR per 1 ppb SO2 = 1.07; 95% CI, 1.01–1.13] and tetralogy of Fallot (OR per 10 ppb NO2 = 1.20; 95% CI, 1.02–1.42; OR per 1 ppb SO2 = 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01–1.05), and PM10 (particulate matter ≤ 10 μm) exposure was related to an increased risk of atrial septal defects (OR per 10 μg/m3 = 1.14; 95% CI, 1.01–1.28). Meta-analyses found no statistically significant increase in risk of other cardiac anomalies and oral clefts. Conclusions We found some evidence for an effect of ambient air pollutants on congenital cardiac anomaly risk. Improvements in the areas of exposure assessment, outcome harmonization, assessment of other congenital anomalies, and mechanistic knowledge are needed to advance this field

Risk estimates of recurrent congenital anomalies in the UK: a population-based register study

BACKGROUND: Recurrence risks for familial congenital anomalies in successive pregnancies are known, but this information for major structural anomalies is lacking. We estimated the absolute and relative risks of recurrent congenital anomaly in the second pregnancy for women with a history of a congenital anomaly in the first pregnancy; for all major anomaly groups and subtypes. METHODS: Population-based register data on 18,605 singleton pregnancies affected by major congenital anomaly occurring in 872,493 singleton stillbirths, live births and terminations of pregnancy for fetal anomaly were obtained from the Northern Congenital Abnormality Survey, North of England, UK, for 1985-2010. Absolute risks (ARs) and relative risks (RRs) for recurrent congenital anomaly (overall, from a similar group, from a dissimilar group) in the second pregnancy were estimated by history of congenital anomaly (overall, by group, by subtype) in the first pregnancy. RESULTS: The estimated prevalences of congenital anomaly in first and second pregnancies were 276 (95% CI 270-281) and 163 (95% CI 159-168) per 10,000 respectively. For women whose first pregnancy was affected by congenital anomaly, the AR of recurrent congenital anomaly in the second pregnancy was 408 (95% CI 365-456) per 10,000; 2.5 (95% CI 2.3-2.8, p<0.0001) times higher than for those with unaffected first pregnancies. For similar anomalies, the recurrence risk was considerably elevated (RR=23.8, 95% CI 19.6-27.9, P<0.0001) while for dissimilar anomalies the increase was more modest (RR=1.4, 95% CI 1.2-1.6, P=0.001), although the ARs for both were 2%. CONCLUSIONS: Absolute recurrence risks varied between 1 in 20 and 1 in 30 for most major anomaly groups. At pre-conception and antenatal counselling, women whose first pregnancy was affected by a congenital anomaly and who are planning a further pregnancy may find it reassuring that despite high relative risks, the absolute recurrence risk is relatively low