Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T05:22:53.475Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Representativeness of the German National Register for Congenital Heart Defects: a clinically oriented analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 October 2015

Paul C. Helm ,
Marc-André Koerten ,
Hashim Abdul-Khaliq ,
Helmut Baumgartner ,
Deniz Kececioglu  and
Ulrike M. M. Bauer
Paul C. Helm
Affiliation:
National Register for Congenital Heart Defects, BerlinGermany
Marc-André Koerten
Affiliation:
National Register for Congenital Heart Defects, BerlinGermany
Hashim Abdul-Khaliq
Affiliation:
National Register for Congenital Heart Defects, BerlinGermany Department of Paediatric Cardiology, Saarland University Medical Center, HomburgGermany
Helmut Baumgartner
Affiliation:
National Register for Congenital Heart Defects, BerlinGermany Center for Adults with Congenital Heart Defects (EMAH-Center), University Hospital Muenster, MuensterGermany
Deniz Kececioglu
Affiliation:
National Register for Congenital Heart Defects, BerlinGermany Heart and Diabetes Center North Rhine-Westphalia, Center for Congenital Heart Defects, Bad OeynhausenGermany
Ulrike M. M. Bauer*
Affiliation:
National Register for Congenital Heart Defects, BerlinGermany Competence Network for Congenital Heart Defects, Berlin, Germany
*
Correspondence to: Dr U. M. M. Bauer, Kompetenznetz Angeborene Herzfehler e. V., Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353 Berlin, Germany. Tel: +49 304 593 7277; Fax: +49 304 593 7278; E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background

Approximately 6000 children are born with CHD in Germany each year. It is increasingly rare that these children die from their chronic illness. In the present study, data recorded in the National Register for Congenital Heart Defects with respect to the prevalence of specific lesions and sex distribution are compared with that recorded in a published German prevalence study (Prevalence Study) and with the meta-analysis by van der Linde et al.

Methods

A descriptive data analysis was performed using a minimal data set. The demographic data included sex and birth year; the medical data comprised the cardiovascular diagnosis according to the short list of the International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code.

Results

As the data analysis shows, the National Register is a clinical register including primarily clinical cases/cases relevant to healthcare. The prevalence values and sex ratios recorded in the register are closer to the values given in the literature than those determined by the Prevalence Study. Severe CHD was slightly over-represented in the National Register compared with the van der Linde et al meta-analysis. The deviations with respect to prevalence values are within an acceptable range.

Conclusion

With its 48,000 patients, the National Register plays a unique and important role for research in the field of CHD. Samples from the National Register can be used as a gold standard for future studies, as the patient population registered in it can be considered representative of CHD in Germany and Europe.

Keywords

CHDprevalenceclinical registerrepresentativesex distribution
Type
Original Articles
Information
Cardiology in the Young , Volume 26 , Issue 5 , June 2016 , pp. 921 - 926
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Bauer, U, Lange, PE. Kompetenznetz angeborene herzfehler. Humboldt-Spektrum 2003; 10: 4–9.Google Scholar
2. Schwedler, G, Lindinger, A, Lange, PE, et al. Frequency and spectrum of congenital heart defects among live births in Germany: a study of the Competence Network for Congenital Heart Defects. Clin Res Cardiol 2011; 100: 1111–1117.Google Scholar
3. Marelli, AJ, Mackie, AS, Ionescu-Ittu, R, et al. Congenital heart disease in the general population: changing prevalence and age distribution. Circulation 2007; 115: 163–167.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Kovacs, AH, Verstappen, A. The whole adult congenital heart disease patient. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 2011; 53: 247–253.Google Scholar
5. Sable, C, Foster, E, Uzark, K, et al. Best practices in managing transition to adulthood for adolescents with congenital heart disease: the transition process and medical and psychosocial issues: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2011; 123: 1454–1485.Google Scholar
6. van der Linde, D, Konings, EE, Slager, MA, et al. Birth prevalence of congenital heart disease worldwide: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011; 58: 2241–2247.Google Scholar
7. International Society for Nomenclature of Paediatric and Congenital Heart Disease. International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code. IPCCC. Retrieved February 19, 2015, from www.ipccc.net/Download%20the%20IPCCC/AEPC/DownloadAEPCTOC.htm Google Scholar
8. Schumacher, G, Hess, J, Bühlmeyer, K. Klinische Kinderkardiologie, 3rd edn. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2001.Google Scholar
9. Hanslik, A, Pospisil, U, Salzer-Muhar, U, Greber-Platzer, S, Male, C. Predictors of spontaneous closure of isolated secundum atrial septal defect in children: a longitudinal study. Pediatrics 2006; 118: 1560–1565.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10. Taylor, BV, Palmer, A, Simpson, S Jr, Lucas, R, et al. Assessing possible selection bias in a national voluntary MS longitudinal study in Australia. Mult Scler 2013; 19: 1627–1631.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Helm supplementary material

Appendix

Download Helm supplementary material(File)
File 17.1 KB