Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T03:56:47.606Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The prevalence of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder following neonatal aortic arch repair

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2014

Joseph J. Sistino*
Affiliation:
Medical University of South Carolina, College of Health Professions, Charleston, United States of America
Andrew M. Atz
Affiliation:
Medical University of South Carolina, College of Medicine, Charleston, United States of America
Kit N. Simpson
Affiliation:
Medical University of South Carolina, College of Health Professions, Charleston, United States of America
Charles Ellis Jr
Affiliation:
Medical University of South Carolina, College of Health Professions, Charleston, United States of America
John S. Ikonomidis
Affiliation:
Medical University of South Carolina, Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Charleston, United States of America
Scott M. Bradley
Affiliation:
Medical University of South Carolina, Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Charleston, United States of America
*
Correspondence to: J. J. Sistino, Medical University of South Carolina, 151B Rutledge Ave, MSC 962, Charleston, SC 29425, United States of America. Tel: (843) 792-9262; Fax: (843) 793-3327; E-mail: sistinoj@musc.edu

Abstract

Objective: We sought to determine the prevalence of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in a population of children who underwent neonatal heart surgery involving repair of the aortic arch for Norwood Stage I, interrupted aortic arch, and combined repair of aortic coarctation with ventricular septal defect. Methods: Children between the ages of 5 and 16 were surveyed using the ADHD-IV and the Child Heath Questionnaire-50. Classification as attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder was defined for this study as either a parent-reported diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder or ADHD-IV inattention score of ⩾93 percentile. Results: Of the 134 surveys, 57 (43%) were returned completed. A total of 25 (44%) children either had a diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and/or ADHD-IV inattention score ⩾93 percentile. Eleven of the 13 (85%) children with interrupted aortic arch, 3 of the 7 (42.9%) children with combined coarctation/ventricular septal defect repair, and 9 of the 33 (27.3%) children with hypoplastic left-heart syndrome were classified as having attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Only 7 of the 25 (28%) children received medical treatment for this condition. Quality of life indicators in the Child Heath Questionnaire-50 Questionnaire were highly correlated with the ADHD-IV scores. Conclusion: The risks for the development of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder are multifactorial but are significantly increased in this post-surgical population. This study revealed a low treatment rate for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and a significant impact on the quality of life in these children.

Type
Original Articles
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2014 

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. Pelham, WE, Foster, EM, Robb, JA. The economic impact of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents. J Pediatr Psychol 2007; 32: 711727.Google Scholar
2. Mahle, WT, Clancy, RR, Moss, EM, Gerdes, M, Jobes, DR, Wernovsky, G. Neurodevelopmental outcome and lifestyle assessment in school-aged and adolescent children with hypoplastic left heart syndrome. Pediatrics 2000; 105: 10821089.Google Scholar
3. Shillingford, AJ, Glanzman, MM, Ittenbach, RF, Clancy, RR, Gaynor, JW, Wernovsky, G. Inattention, hyperactivity, and school performance in a population of school-age children with complex congenital heart disease. Pediatrics 2008; 121: e759e767.Google Scholar
4. Sistino, J. Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder after neonatal surgery: review of the pathophysiology and risk factors. Perfusion 2013; 28: 484494.Google Scholar
5. Anastopoulos, AD, DuPaul, GJ, Power, TJ, Reid, R. ADHD Rating Scale-IV: Checklists, Norms, and Clinical Interpretation. Guilford Press, New York, NY, 1998.Google Scholar
6. Rentz, AM, Matza, LS, Secnik, K, Swensen, A, Revicki, DA. Psychometric validation of the child health questionnaire (CHQ) in a sample of children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Qual Life Res 2005; 14: 719734.Google Scholar
7. Kessler, RC, Adler, L, Ames, M, et al. The prevalence and effects of adult attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder on work performance in a nationally representative sample of workers. J Occup Environ Med 2005; 47: 565572.Google Scholar
8. Gothelf, D, Presburger, G, Levy, D, et al. Genetic, developmental, and physical factors associated with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in patients with velocardiofacial syndrome. Am J Med Genet 2004; 126B: 116121.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9. Botto, LD, May, K, Fernhoff, PM, et al. A population-based study of the 22q11.2 deletion: phenotype, incidence, and contribution to major birth defects in the population. Pediatrics 2003; 112 (Pt 1): 101107.Google Scholar
10. Momma, K. Cardiovascular anomalies associated with chromosome 22q11.2 deletion syndrome. American J Cardiol 2010; 105: 16171624.Google Scholar
11. Lou, HC. Etiology and pathogenesis of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: significance of prematurity and perinatal hypoxic-haemodynamic encephalopathy. Acta Paediatr 1996; 85: 12661271.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12. Decker, MJ, Rye, DB. Neonatal intermittent hypoxia impairs dopamine signaling and executive functioning. Sleep Breath 2002; 6: 205210.Google Scholar
13. Qiu, A, Crocetti, D, Adler, M, et al. Basal ganglia volume and shape in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Am J Psychiatry 2009; 166: 7482.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14. Batra, AS, Alexander, ME, Silka, MJ. Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, stimulant therapy, and the patient with congenital heart disease: evidence and reason. Pediatr Cardiol 2012; 33: 394401.Google Scholar
15. Rempel, GR, Harrison, MJ. Safeguarding precarious survival: parenting children who have life-threatening heart disease. Qual Health Res 2007; 17: 824837.Google Scholar