Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T08:04:21.077Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Conjoined Twins - An Epidemiological Study Based on 312 Cases

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

The International Clearinghouse for Birth Defects Monitoring Systems

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Data on conjoined twins have been collected from 14 different malformation monitoring programs around the world. Among over 28 million births, 312 cases were identified. After considering underascertainment in one large program, the best estimate of the incidence based on the sum of induced abortions and births is 1.3 per 100,000 births. The distribution according to type of twinning, the sex distribution (39% males) and the stillbirth rate (47%) are presented. The presence of malformations not directly related to the area of fusion is discussed. In three women, thyroid disease was present and five women had been treated for infertility before conception.

Keywords

Conjoined twinsPrevalenceSex distributionDrugsMalformations
Type
Research Article
Information
Acta geneticae medicae et gemellologiae: twin research , Volume 40 , Issue 3-4 , October 1991 , pp. 325 - 335
Copyright
Copyright © The International Society for Twin Studies 1991

Footnotes

1 The following programs (program directors in parentheses) participated in the study: Australian Congenital Malformation Monitoring System (Paul A.L. Lancaster),Czechoslovakian Registry and Monitor of Congenital Malformations (Jirí Kučera), The Danish Registry of Congenital Malformations (Lisbeth B. Knudsen), Congenital Malformations Monitoring Program of England and Wales (Beverley J. Botting), Central-East France Register of Congenital Malformations (Elisabeth Robert), Paris Register of Congenital Malformations (Janine Goujard), Hungarian Congenital Malformation Registry (Csaba Elek), Italian Multicentric Register on Congenital Malformations, IPIMC (Pierpaolo Mastroiacovo), Emilia-Romagna Registry of Congenital Malformations, IMER (Guido Cocchi), New Zealand Congenital Anomalies Monitoring Program (Barry Borman), Medical Birth Registry of Norway (Lorentz Irgens), Latin American Collaborative Study of Congenital Malformations, ECLAMC (Eduardo Castilla), Spanish Collaborative Study of Congenital Malformations, ECEMC (María Luisa Martínez-Frías), The Swedish Registry of Congenital Malformations (Anders Ericson).

References

REFERENCES

1. Bheattay, E, Nelson, MM, Beighton, P (1975): Epidemic of conjoined twins in southern Africa? Lancet ii:741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Brambali, B, Lanzani, A, Sanchiani, L, Tulin, L (1990): Conjoined twins and inutero early exposure to prochlorperazine. Reprod Toxicol 4:331–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Broman, I (1911): Normale and Abnorme Entwicklung des Menschen. Wiesbaden: J.F. Bergman Verlag.Google Scholar
4. Castilla, EE, Lopez-Carmelo, JS, Orioli, IM, Sanchez, O, Paz, JE (1988): The epidemiology of conjoined twins in Latin America. Acta Genet Med Gemellol 37:111–118.Google ScholarPubMed
5. Derom, C, Vlietnick, R, Derom, R, van den Berghe, H, Thiery, M (1988): Population-based study of sex proportion in monoamniotic twins. New Engl J Med 319:119.Google ScholarPubMed
6. Edmonds, LD, Layde, PM (1982): Conjoined twins in the United States, 1970-1977. Teratology 25:301–308.Google Scholar
7. International Clearinghouse for Birth Defects Monitoring Systems (1991): Congenital Malformations Worldwide. Amsterdam, New York, Oxford: Elsevier, ISBN 0444 89137 Y.Google Scholar
8. Källén, B (1986): Congenital malformations in twins: A population study. Acta Genet Med Gemellol 35:167–178.Google Scholar
9. Källén, B, Rybo, G (1978): Conjoined twinning in Sweden. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 57:257–259.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10. Knudsen, LB (1987): No association between griseofulvin and conjoined twinning. Lancet ii:1097.Google Scholar
11. Little, J, Bryan, E (1986): Congenital anomalies in twins. Seminars in Perinatology 10:50–64.Google Scholar
12. Machin, GA, Sperber, GH (1987): Invited editorial comment: Lessons from conjoined twins. Amer J Med Genet 28:89–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Metneki, J, Czeizel, A (1989): Conjoined twins in Hungary, 1970-1986. Acta Genet Med Gemellol 38:285–299.Google ScholarPubMed
14. Milham, S Jr (1966): Symmetrical conjoined twins: An analysis of the birth records of twenty-two sets. J Pediatr 69:643–652.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15. Myrianthopoulos, NC (1976): Congenital malformations in twins. Acta Genet Med Gemellol 25:331–335.Google Scholar
16. National Perinatal Statistics Unit, University of Sidney (1988): Congenital Malformations Monitoring Report. 03 1988. ISSN 0726-4046.Google Scholar
17. Rosa, FW, Hernandez, C, Carlo, WA (1986): Griseofulvin teratology, including two thoracopagus conjoined twins. Lancet i: 171.Google Scholar
18. Schinzel, AAGL, Smith, DW, Miller, JR (1979): Monozygotic twinning and structural defects. J Pediatr 95:921–930.Google Scholar
19. Selby, LA, Khaalili, A, Stewart, RW, Edmonds, LD, Marienfield, CJ (1973): Pathology and epidemiology of conjoined twinning in swine. Teratology 8:1–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20. Witchi, E (1934): Appearance of accessory “organizers” in overripe eggs of the frog. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 31:419.Google Scholar