Is there an association between maternal @entity2049 use during pregnancy and @entity735 in the XXXX ?

@entity1 @entity154 @entity5305 @entity2050 @entity4353 @entity600 @entity735 @entity17347 @entity619 @entity4643 @entity2049
PURPOSE: To check for an association between @entity2049 ( @entity2050 ) use by the mother during pregnancy and @entity735 (i.e., @entity17347 , @entity4353 , and @entity4643 ) in the @entity1 , as suggested by Sutcliffe et al. (1998), who reported four cases. METHODS: We checked all the cases with these @entity735 for @entity2050 use by the mother in the EUROCAT Northern Netherlands dataset, which registers @entity1 with @entity600 and records possible teratogenic exposures (including medication taken by the mother). We also reviewed 13 studies in the literature. RESULTS: The EUROCAT dataset recorded 77 cases of @entity17347 , @entity4353 , or @entity4643 , but none with prenatal exposure to @entity2050 . Prenatal @entity2050 exposure was recorded in seven other cases without @entity735 . Large studies in the literature on the teratogenic effects of @entity2050 (and other antiepileptic drugs), including data from the MADRE database, revealed no association between these @entity735 and prenatal @entity2050 exposure. One case reported @entity17347 and other @entity154 after prenatal exposure to @entity2050 in combination with @entity5305 and @entity619 . CONCLUSIONS: Our data do not support Sutcliffe's suggestion that prenatal @entity2050 exposure may result in @entity735 . However, despite the large population represented, both the low birth prevalence of these @entity735 and the low prevalence of @entity2050 exposure during pregnancy make it difficult to exclude an increased relative risk. The many large prospective and retrospective studies in the literature seem to agree with our findings, although there is still uncertainty about the teratogenic effect of @entity2050 in polytherapy.
