Guzmán-Huerta ME, Muro-Barragán SA, Acevedo-Gallegos S, Velázquez-Torres B, Gallardo-Gaona JM, Ramírez-Calvo JA, Camargo-Marín L, Benavides-Serralde JA, Aguinaga-Ríos M

Language: Spanish
References: 20
Page: 300-306
PDF size: 270.24 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objective. The aim of this study is to describe the phenotype of fetuses affected by amniotic band sequence (ABS) that were diagnosed at the Instituto Nacional de Perinatología Isidro Espinosa de los Reyes and to propose a new classification based on morphologic findings. Material and methods. Cases with a final diagnosis of amniotic band sequence, diagnosed between January 1993 and July 2010 in the Department of Maternal Fetal Medicine, were reviewed. Demographic, clinical, and periconceptional data were collected, and the defects were described and classified. The association frequencies of the defects were also determined. Results. We included 50 cases with prenatal diagnosis of amniotic band sequence. The mean maternal age was 25.7 ± 6.9 years. Of these patients, 54% (27/50) were primiparous compared to 22% (11/50) who had three or more previous pregnancies. Craniofacial defects were seen in 78% (39/50) of the cases, followed by defects of the extremities 70% (35/50), abdominal wall, spine, and/or thorax 52% (26/50). The most frequent defects were the following: a) Encephalocele and facial clefts in the craniofacial group. b) Shortening at any level in the limb defects group, and c) Alterations of the spinal column curvature in the group of “other” defects. Conclusions. The amniotic band sequence shows a tendency to affect women who are in their earlier years of reproduction. We observed an inverse relationship between the number of pregnancies and the frequency of presentation of this pathology. The majority of affected fetuses showed a phenotype that fit into one of many groups. Therefore, we propose classifying the amniotic band sequence phenotypes into the following groups: I. Craniofacial defect + limb defect. II. Craniofacial defect + limb defect + abdominal wall, spinal column, and/or thoracic defects. III. Limb defect + abdominal wall, spinal column, and/or thoracic defects; and IV. Isolated defect (craniofacial, limb, or thoraco-abdominal wall). This classification system will be helpful in diagnosing amniotic band sequence. Based on future research studies, we hope that we can use this classification system as a prognosis fetal factor to establish a more accurate fetal prognosis and recurrence probability. Finally, we created a flowchart describing all of the steps that were followed by our Department from the moment an amniotic band was found by ultrasound until the definitive diagnosis was made and the follow up according to the fetal findings.

REFERENCES

1. Seeds JW, Cefalo RC, Herbert WNP. Amniotic Band Syndrome. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1982; 144: 243.

2. Hüsler M, Wilson R, Horri S, et al. When is fetoscopic release of amniotic bands indicated? Review of outcome of cases treated in utero and selection criteria for fetal surgery. Prenat Diagn 2009; 29(5): 457-63.

3. Torpin R. Amniochorionic mesoblastic fibrous strings and amniotic bands: associated constricting fetal malformations or fetal death. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1965; 91: 65-75.

4. Streeter GL. Focal deficiencies in fetal tissues and their relation to intrauterine amputation. Contrib Embriol Carnegie Ins 1930; 22: 1.

5. Robin N, Franklin J, Prucka S, et al. Clefting, amniotic bands, and polydactyly: a distinct phenotype that supports an intrinsic mechanism for amniotic band sequence. Am J Med Genet 2005; 137A(3): 298-301.

6. Kino Y. Clinical and experimental studies of the congenital constriction band syndrome, with an emphasis on its etiology. J Bone Joint surg 1975; 57A: 636-42.

7. Daya M, Makakole M. Congenital vascular anomalies in amniotic band syndrome of the limbs. J of Pediatr Surg 2011; 46: 507-13.

8. Werler M, Bosco J, Shapira S. Maternal vasoactive exposure, amniotic bands, and terminal transverse limb defects. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol 2009; 85(1): 52-7.

9. Hunter AG, Seaver LH, Stevenson RE. Limb-body wall defect. Is there a defensible hypothesis and can it explain all the associated anomalies? Am J Med Genet Part A 2011; 155: 2045-59.

10. Seidman JD, Abbondanzo SL, Watkin, et al. Amniotic band syndrome. Arch Path Lab Med 1989; 113: 891-7.

11. Garza A, Cordero JF, Mulinare J. Epidemiology of the early amnion rupture spectrum of defects. Am J Dis Child 1988; 142(5): 541-4.

12. Orioli I, Ribeiro M, Castilla E. Clinical and epidemiological studies of amniotic deformity, adhesion, and mutilation (ADAM) sequence in a South American (ECLAMC) population. Am J Med Genet 2003; 118A(2): 135-45.

13. Werler M, Louik C, Mitchell A. Epidemiologic analysis of maternal factors and amniotic band defects. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol 2003; 67(1): 68-72.

14. Martínez-Frías ML. Epidemiological characteristics of amniotic band sequence and body Wall complex: are two different entities? Am J Med Genet 1997; 73(2): 176-9.

15. Davies B, Giménez-Scherer JA, Hernández-Sierra JF. Fetal amniotic adhesions. Their topographic concordance with regionally clustered malformations. Arch of Med Res 2001; 32(1): 48-61.

16. Soldado F, Aguirre M, Peiró JL, et al. Fetoscopic release of extremity amniotic bands with risk of amputation. J Pediatr Orthop 2009; 29(3): 290-3.

17. Grewal J, Carmichael JL, Yang W, et al. Paternal Age and Congenital Malformation in Offspring in California 1989-2002. Matern Child Health J 2012; 16: 385-92.

18. INEGI. Estadísticas de educación. 2001.

19. Jamsheer A, Materna-kiryluk A, Badura-Stronka M, et al. Comparative study of clinical characteristics of amniotic rupture sequence with and without body wall defect: further evidence for separation. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol 2009; 85: 211-5.

20. Chen Ch. Syndromes, disorders and maternal risk factors associated with neural tube defects (III). Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 2008; 47(2): 131-40.