Home Antenatal risk factors for symptomatic congenital CMV disease following primary maternal CMV infection
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Antenatal risk factors for symptomatic congenital CMV disease following primary maternal CMV infection

  • Eran Hadar EMAIL logo , Liat Salzer , Elizabeta Dorfman , Jacob Amir and Joseph Pardo
Published/Copyright: August 13, 2015

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate antenatal risk factors associated with symptomatic congenital cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease, following in utero vertical infection.

Methods: This study included a retrospective cohort of 155 neonates with congenital CMV infection, following primary maternal CMV infection during pregnancy, and were divided to symptomatic (n=95) and asymptomatic (n=60) newborns.

Results: Young maternal age (29.1±5.12 vs. 31.6±5.36 years, P=0.005), high risk occupation for viral exposure (20.0% vs. 11.7%, P=0.04), CMV IgG seroconversion at diagnosis (83.1% vs. 63.3%, P=0.005) and abnormal fetal MRI (11.6% vs. 0%, P=0.003) were found to be prognostic risk factors associated with symptomatic CMV disease of the newborn. Maternal febrile illness at diagnosis, IgG avidity, US findings and the timing of maternal infection were not associated with the occurrence of neonatal symptoms.

Conclusions: Knowledge of the reported risk factors may assist in counseling parents with intra uterine CMV infection.

References

[1] Stagno S, Whitley RJ. Herpesvirus infections of pregnancy. Part I: Cytomegalovirus and Epstein-Barr virus infections. N Engl J Med. 1985;313:1270–4.10.1056/NEJM198511143132006Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[2] Stagno S, Pass RF, Dworsky ME, Henderson RE, Moore EG, Walton PD, et al. Congenital cytomegalovirus infection: the relative importance of primary and recurrent maternal infection. N Engl J Med. 1982;306:945–9.10.1056/NEJM198204223061601Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[3] Stagno S, Pass RF, Dworsky ME, Alford CA Jr. Maternal cytomegalovirus infection and perinatal transmission. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 1982;25:563–76.10.1097/00003081-198209000-00014Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[4] Istas AS, Demmler GJ, Dobbins JG, Stewart JA. Surveillance for congenital cytomegalovirus disease: a report from the National Congenital Cytomegalovirus Disease Registry. Clin Infect Dis. 1995;20:665–70.10.1093/clinids/20.3.665Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[5] Degani S. Sonographic findings in fetal viral infections: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2006;61:329–36.10.1097/01.ogx.0000216518.85796.88Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[6] Malinger G, Lev D, Zahalka N, Ben Aroia Z, Watemberg N, Kidron D, et al. Fetal cytomegalovirus infection of the brain: the spectrum of sonographic findings. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2003;24:28–32.Search in Google Scholar

[7] Leung AK, Sauve RS, Davies HD. Congenital cytomegalovirus infection. J Natl Med Assoc. 2003;95:213–8.Search in Google Scholar

[8] Boppana SB, Pass RF, Britt WJ, Stagno S, Alford CA. Symptomatic congenital cytomegalovirus infection: neonatal morbidity and mortality. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 1992;11:93–9.10.1097/00006454-199202000-00007Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[9] Dollard SC, Grosse SD, Ross DS. New estimates of the prevalence of neurological and sensory sequelae and mortality associated with congenital cytomegalovirus infection. Reviews in Medical Virology. 2007;17:355–63.10.1002/rmv.544Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[10] Cannon MJ, Griffiths PD, Aston V, Rawlinson WD. Universal newborn screening for congenital CMV infection: what is the evidence of potential benefit? Rev Med Virol. 2014;24:291–307.10.1002/rmv.1790Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[11] Bodéus M, Hubinont C, Goubau P. Increased risk of cytomegalovirus transmission in utero during late gestation. Obstet Gynecol. 1999;93:658–60.Search in Google Scholar

[12] Stagno S, Pass RF, Cloud G, Britt WJ, Henderson RE, Walton PD, et al. Primary cytomegalovirus infection in pregnancy. Incidence, transmission to fetus, and clinical outcome. J Am Med Assoc. 1986;256:1904–8.10.1001/jama.256.14.1904Search in Google Scholar

[13] Enders G, Daiminger A, Bäder U, Exler S, Enders M. Intrauterine transmission and clinical outcome of 248 pregnancies with primary cytomegalovirus infection in relation to gestational age. J Clin Virol. 2011;52:244–6.10.1016/j.jcv.2011.07.005Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[14] Liesnard C, Donner C, Brancart F, Gosselin F, Delforge ML, Rodesch F. Prenatal diagnosis of congenital cytomegalovirus infection: prospective study of 237 pregnancies at risk. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;95:881–8.10.1097/00006250-200006000-00019Search in Google Scholar

[15] Pass RF, Fowler KB, Boppana SB, Britt WJ, Stagno S. Congenital cytomegalovirus infection following first trimester maternal infection: symptoms at birth and outcome. J Clin Virol. 2006;35:216–20.10.1016/j.jcv.2005.09.015Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[16] Gindes L, Teperberg-Oikawa M, Sherman D, Pardo J, Rahav G. Congenital cytomegalovirus infection following primary maternal infection in the third trimester. BJOG. 2008;115:830–5.10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01651.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

[17] Benoist G, Salomon LJ, Jacquemard F, Daffos F, Ville Y. The prognostic value of ultrasound abnormalities and biological parameters in blood of fetuses infected with cytomegalovirus. BJOG. 2008;115:823–9.10.1111/j.1471-0528.2008.01714.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

[18] Lazzarotto T, Varani S, Guerra B, Nicolosi A, Lanari M, Landini MP. Prenatal indicators of congenital cytomegalovirus infection. J Pediatr. 2000;137:90–5.10.1067/mpd.2000.107110Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[19] Guerra B, Lazzarotto T, Quarta S, Lanari M, Bovicelli L, Nicolosi A, et al. Prenatal diagnosis of symptomatic congential cytomegalovirus infection. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;183:476–82.10.1067/mob.2000.106347Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[20] Sonoyama A, Ebina Y, Morioka I, Tanimura K, Morizane M, Tairaku S, et al. Low IgG avidity and ultrasound fetal abnormality predict congenital cytomegalovirus infection. J Med Virol. 2012;84:1928–33.10.1002/jmv.23387Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[21] De Paschale M, Agrappi C, Manco MT, Clerici P. Positive predictive value of anti-HCMV IgM as an index of primary infection. J Virol Methods. 2010;168:121–5.10.1016/j.jviromet.2010.05.001Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[22] Mace M, Sissoeff L, Rudent A, Grangeot-Keros L. A serological testing algorithm for the diagnosis of primary CMV infection in pregnant women. Prenat Diagn. 2004;24:861–3.10.1002/pd.1001Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[23] Lazzarotto T, Guerra B, Gabrielli L, Lanari M, Landini MP. Update on the prevention, diagnosis and management of cytomegalovirus infection during pregnancy. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2011;17:1285–93.10.1111/j.1469-0691.2011.03564.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

[24] Lipitz S, Yagel S, Shalev E, Achiron R, Mashiach S, Schiff E Prenatal diagnosis of fetal primary cytomegalovirus infection. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;89:763–7.10.1016/S0029-7844(97)00084-7Search in Google Scholar

[25] Lipitz S, Achiron R, Zalel Y, Mendelson E, Tepperberg M, Gamzu R. Outcome of pregnancies with vertical transmission of primary cytomegalovirus infection. Obstet Gynecol. 2002;100:428–33.Search in Google Scholar

[26] Guerra B, Simonazzi G, Puccetti C, Lanari M, Farina A, Lazzarotto T, et al. Ultrasound prediction of symptomatic congenital cytomegalovirus infection. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;198:380.e1–7.10.1016/j.ajog.2007.09.052Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[27] Malinger G, Ben-Sira L, Lev D, Ben-Aroya Z, Kidron D, Lerman-Sagie T. Fetal brain imaging: a comparison between magnetic resonance imaging and dedicated neurosonography. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2004;23:333–40.10.1002/uog.1016Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[28] Picone O, Simon I, Benachi A, Brunelle F, Sonigo P. Comparison between ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in assessment of fetal cytomegalovirus infection. Prenat Diagn. 2008;28:753–8.10.1002/pd.2037Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[29] Benoist G, Salomon LJ, Mohlo M, Suarez B, Jacquemard F, Ville Y. Cytomegalovirus-related fetal brain lesions: comparison between targeted ultrasound examination and magnetic resonance imaging. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008;32:900–5.10.1002/uog.6129Search in Google Scholar PubMed

The authors stated that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this article.

Received: 2014-10-18
Accepted: 2015-7-22
Published Online: 2015-8-13
Published in Print: 2016-4-1

©2016 by De Gruyter

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Editorial
  3. The emergence of obstetric medicine
  4. Mini review
  5. Folate status and health: challenges and opportunities
  6. Original articles - Obstetrics
  7. Increased levels of serum clusterin is associated with intrauterine growth restriction and adverse pregnancy outcomes in preeclampsia
  8. The utility of clinical findings to predict laboratory values in hypertensive disorders of pregnancy
  9. Association between decreased plasma levels of soluble human leukocyte antigen-G and severe pre-eclampsia
  10. Umbilical cord plasma interferon-induced protein 10 (IP-10) and interferon-induced T-cell alpha chemoattractant (ITAC) levels are lower in women with severe preeclampsia
  11. The prognostic value of first-trimester cystatin C levels for gestational complications
  12. Experiences of 6 years quality assurance in obstetrics in Nigeria – a critical review of results and obstacles
  13. Are there anamnestic risk factors for iron deficiency in pregnancy? Results from a feasibility study
  14. Is there any relationship between serum sirtuin-1 level and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio in hyperemesis gravidarum?
  15. Pregnancy outcomes among renal transplant recipients and patients with end-stage renal disease on dialysis
  16. Are pregnant women safer in motor vehicle accidents?
  17. Amniotic fluid as a source of multipotent cells for clinical use
  18. Original articles - Newborn
  19. Antenatal risk factors for symptomatic congenital CMV disease following primary maternal CMV infection
  20. Effects of preeclampsia on the amplitude integrated electroencephalography activity in preterm infants
  21. Short communication
  22. The impact of uterine curettage postpartum on maternal sFlt-1 concentration
  23. Letter to the Editor
  24. Fetal cerebroplacental ratio and adverse perinatal outcome
  25. Letter to the Editor – Reply
  26. Reply to: Fetal cerebroplacental ratio and adverse perinatal outcome
  27. Congress Calendar
  28. Congress Calendar
Downloaded on 28.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/jpm-2014-0322/html
Scroll to top button