Preprint
Article

This version is not peer-reviewed.

Microcephaly and Central Nervous System Abnormalities During the Zika Outbreak in Rio de Janeiro

A peer-reviewed article of this preprint also exists.

Submitted:

30 December 2024

Posted:

31 December 2024

You are already at the latest version

Abstract
This retrospective cohort study included 7,870 pregnant women (2,269 with confirmed Zika virus (ZIKV) infection and 5,601 without Zika infection) and their concepts. We obtained data from different databases in the state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. We used a propensity score model to control for confounding factors and stratify between the trimesters of pregnancy. Of the ZIKV+ pregnant women, 49 cases of congenital microcephaly or congenital nervous system (CNS) abnormalities were identified (2.16% or 193.9 cases in 10 000 live births), whereas 44 cases were identified among ZIKV- women (0.78% or 71.4 cases in 10 000 live births). The multivariable analysis evidenced an odds ratio of 2.46 (95% CI 1.30-4.64), 4.29 (95% CI 1.93-9.53) in the first trimester, 5.29 (95% CI 1.08-25.95) in the second trimester and 0.68 (95% CI 0.21-2.14) in the third trimester. The most common findings among ZIKV+ cases were intracranial calcifications, ventriculomegaly, posterior fossa malformations, reduced brain volume, corpus callosum malformations, cortex dysplasia, lissencephaly, and pachygyria. 55.5% of the ophthalmologic exams were abnormal, and anomalies % of brainstem auditory evoked potentials were reported in 33.3%.
Keywords: 
;  ;  

1. Introduction

The Zika virus (ZIKV) has gone from a virus associated with mild infections to one of the most studied viruses worldwide in the past six years. Between 2015 and 2016, the ZIKV was responsible for the Americas' outbreak, especially in Brazil. During this period, the first reports of pregnant women with confirmed or suspected ZIKV infection showing fetuses and newborns with severe congenital malformations, especially microcephaly and central nervous system (CNS) abnormalities, led to a strong suspicion of their association with the virus. Since then, evidence has favored this association [1,2,3].
As of January 2018, more than 3,700 cases of congenital Zika Syndrome (CZS) have been notified in the Americas [4]. Local transmission of the ZIKV has been reported in 87 countries and territories worldwide, both in tropical and subtropical areas. The transmission of ZIKV has significantly dropped since the end of 2016, from more than 500,000 cases reported during 2016 to under 30,000 cases in 2018 [5].
ZIKV outbreaks continue to occur in different regions of the world, such as India and Southeast Asia, where a large population of women and their babies are susceptible to ZIKV infection [6], still representing a critical health concern since ZIKV transmission can occur in non-epidemic periods and where most of the cases in pregnant women can be asymptomatic but at risk for their concepts [6,7]. Our study sought to understand better the ZIKV outbreak in the State of Rio de Janeiro and its impacts on pregnant women and their babies.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design and Setting

This retrospective cohort study reports data from Public Health databases between February 2015 and December 2018, containing information about pregnant women and their concepts during the ZIKV outbreak in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. We used five databases in our study: GAL, FORMSUS, RESP, SINASC, and SIM. GAL is an online laboratory system that provides the results of Real-time reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction (RT-PCR) for ZIKV tests and some patient characteristics. FORMSUS is an online database that collects, stores, and creates health data reports, including information about pregnant women. RESP is an online notification used for suspected microcephaly or CNS congenital abnormalities during the ZIKV outbreak in Brazil. SINASC contains all the information about the registered newborns in Brazil, and SIM about deaths in Brazil. All the databases were provided by the Healthy Secretary of Rio de Janeiro, and the study protocol received ethical approval from The Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association (Declaration of Helsinki) (Institutional Review Board number 87402618.3.0000.5275).
We first used the GAL database to identify the two cohorts of pregnant women. Eligibility for confirmed ZIKV infection cohort required at least one positive RT-PCR assay for ZIKV in blood or urine during pregnancy. In the non-ZIKV infection cohort, we included pregnant women with all negative tests, all collected up to five days after the onset of the symptoms for blood samples and up to fourteen days for urine samples. The RESP database was reviewed, case by case, to identify any congenital CNS abnormalities and microcephaly cases. This revision excluded cases initially reported but did not meet the criteria for congenital microcephaly (Intergrowth21st method), as different definitions were used during the ZIKV outbreak in Brazil, especially in its beginning. Finally, a probabilistic linkage was performed among the five databases.
We obtained maternal covariates from this final database, including age, race, marital status, education level, residence region, the presence of twin pregnancy, typo of labor, number of medical appointments during pregnancy, and need for hospitalization signs and symptoms described during pregnancy. For the concepts, besides the presence of microcephaly and CNS abnormalities, we also searched for gender, birth length, weight and cephalic perimeter, death, prematurity, other serologic tests than ZIKV, RT-PCR collected in newborns, type of CNS abnormality when present, signs and symptoms in physical examination, and eye and ears anomalies.

2.2. Statistical Analysis

Descriptive statistics were generated for all baseline data; we calculated prevalence rates by dividing the number of microcephaly/CNS congenital abnormalities by the number of pregnant women in both groups. Outcomes are reported overall and according to the trimester of symptom onset. Continuous variables are presented with a median and interquartile range (IQR), and categorical variables are presented with proportions (%).
Also, categorical variables were compared among women and infants with positive and negative ZIKV RT-PCR results using the Chi-square test, Mann-Whitney test, and Fisher’s exact test, as appropriate. Values of p lower than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Propensity-adjusted analyses control for measured confounding variables were also performed. The covariate adjustment using the propensity score method was used, whereas the outcome variable is regressed on an indicator variable denoting exposure status and the estimated propensity score. As we have a dichotomous outcome, a regression model was utilized. For the logistic model, the exposure effect is an adjusted odds ratio. We used all measured baseline covariates for inclusion in the propensity score model. Values of odds ratio and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were obtained, and values of p lower than 0.05 were also considered statistically significant.

3. Results

3.1. Study Population

From February 2015 to December 2018, we identified 2 269 pregnant women with at least one positive result for ZIKV infection on RT-PCR in blood, urine, or both (ZIKV+), and 5 601 pregnant women with only negative ZIKV infection tests (ZIKV-). Among ZIKV+ women, 758 had positive RT-PCR results in serum specimens, 88 in urine, 270 in serum and urine specimens, and 24 in more than one serum specimen. In those women with positive and negative results, 728 were only positive in serum, and 401 were only in urine. The most common signs and symptoms among ZIKV+ pregnant women were rash, pruritus, headache, arthralgia, myalgia, and fever. Despite that, ZIKV- pregnant women show a predominance of headaches, arthralgia, myalgia, fever, edema and coryza (Table 1).
Of the ZIKV+ pregnant women, 49 cases of congenital microcephaly or CNS abnormalities were identified (2.16%). In the ZIKV- group, 44 cases were identified (0.78%). The prevalence among live births was 193.9 in 10,000 exposed to ZIKV (five fetal losses) and 71.4 in 10,000 not exposed to ZIKV (four fetal losses). The prevalence varied among trimesters when the ZIKV infection occurred: 5.5% in the first trimester, 1.5% in the second, and 0.79% in the third (Table 2).
The baseline characteristics were quite similar between the women with and without ZIKV infection. Most women were aged 21-31, single, lived in the metropolitan area, and had high education. They also had natural labor and at least six medical appointments during pregnancy (Table 3).

3.2. Multivariable Analysis

The odds ratio of congenital microcephaly or CNS abnormalities caused by exposure to ZIKV during pregnancy was 2.46 (95% CI 1.30-4.64). Pregnant women were also stratified in the three different trimesters when the ZIKV infection occurred or was suspected: 4.29 (95% CI 1.93-9.53) in the first trimester, 5.29 (95% CI 1.08-25.95) in the second trimester and 0.68 (95% CI 0.21-2.14) in the third trimester (Table 4).

3.3. Adverse Prenatal and Early Postnatal Infant Outcomes

Among the 93 cases of congenital microcephaly or CNS abnormalities among ZIKV+ and ZIKV- pregnant women, the median maternal age was quite the same in both groups. We did not see statistical differences in maternal race, residence, sex, weight, and length of the concepts. The median and IQR of head circumference were also very similar, as were prematurity, twinning, and fetal loss (Table 5). Maternal symptoms, such as rash and pruritus, were more prevalent in the ZIKV+ group (Table 6).
Thirty-five of the 49 cases of ZIKV+ pregnant women (71.4%) and 20 of the 44 cases of ZIKV- women (45,5%) underwent at least one imaging exam: fetal or cranial ultrasound, cranial computed tomography, or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The most common findings among ZIKV+ cases were intracranial calcifications, ventriculomegaly, posterior fossa malformations, reduced brain volume, corpus callosum malformations, cortex dysplasia, lissencephaly, and pachygyria. ZIKV- cases had very similar findings, although ventriculomegaly was more frequent in this group. Arthrogryposis was the most common physical examination finding. Ophthalmologic exams were performed in nine ZIKV+ newborns (55.5% abnormal) and ten ZIKV- newborns (30% abnormal). Brainstem auditory evoked potentials (BAEPs) were reported in nine ZIKV+ cases (33.3% abnormal) and in six ZIKV- cases (16.6% abnormal) (Table 7).

4. Discussion

Our main evidence is that pregnant women infected with ZIKV are at increased risk of fetuses or newborns with microcephaly or CNS congenital abnormalities when compared to pregnant women with no ZIKV infection, with six to seven times the risk when the infection occurs in the first and second trimesters compared to those in the third trimester.
ZIKV infection signs and symptoms among pregnant women in our cohort were very similar to other studies. Garcell et al. [8], analyzing 1,541 patients with clinical suspicion of arbovirosis, and Tozetto-Mendonza et al. [9], 94 patients with ZIKV acute infection confirmed by RT-PCR, observed a majority of rash, pruritus, arthralgia, headache, and myalgia. In published cohorts of pregnant women with confirmed or probable ZIKV infection, we also observe the predominance of rash, pruritus, arthralgia, headache, and myalgia, besides fever, conjunctivitis, and retro-ocular pain [10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17]. Braga et al. [18] developed a predictive score model to differentiate the symptoms of ZIKV acute infection in regions where other arboviruses coexist. These authors found a sensitivity of 86.6% and specificity of 78.3% in those with rash associated with pruritus or conjunctival hyperemia, without fever, petechiae, or anorexia. Besides, ZIKV infection can be asymptomatic in 50 to 73% of cases in the general population [7,19] and about 69% among pregnant women [12]. Therefore, CZS can occur even in those asymptomatic pregnant women. Meneses et al. [20] describe that 24% of children with CZS, with maternal infection confirmed by RT-PCR, had no reports of symptoms during pregnancy. Vianna et al. [21] also report that 17% of children referred for CZS investigation had no history of maternal symptoms during pregnancy.
Microcephaly or CNS congenital abnormalities has a broad differential etiological diagnosis beyond ZIKV and must include other infections such as dengue, chikungunya, toxoplasmosis, cytomegalovirus (CMV), syphilis, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), parvovirus B19, measles, rubella, chickenpox, herpes virus, Epstein-Barr and enterovirus [22]. Although less common, coinfection should always be considered. We observed a predominance of arthralgia, headache, coryza, edema, fever, and myalgia among pregnant women without ZIKV infection. Dengue typically presents a more exuberant fever associated with rash, headache, and myalgia, while chikungunya is characterized by high fever with rash, polyarthralgia/polyarthritis, myalgia, and edema [23]. Vertical transmission of the dengue virus can occur in pregnant women with viremia at the time of delivery, and it can also be found in breast milk [24,25]. The Chikungunya virus's Neonatal infection can also occur in up to 50% of pregnant women with viremia in the peripartum period [26], ranging from mild to severe cases and lethality in around 2.8% [26,27]. The association between dengue virus and congenital microcephaly or CNS abnormalities is not described. In a case series of 25 brain MRIs performed in congenital infections by the Chikungunya virus, intraparenchymal hemorrhages and white matter abnormalities were described in 14 [28], with no congenital microcephaly. However, postnatal microcephaly is described [29]. Infectious mononucleosis is another possibility, with a higher fetal risk of death and congenital malformations, especially those associated with toxoplasmosis and CMV. Parvovirus B19, rubella, measles, and enteroviruses (mainly Coxsackie A and B) also increase the risk of fetal mortality and congenital malformations [22].
Our cohort's 2.16% prevalence in congenital microcephaly or CNS abnormalities is lower than other studies [30,31]. We must note that (1) only pregnant women with a positive ZIKV RT-PCR were included; (2) the majority of the women were symptomatic (83.7%); therefore, a smaller proportion of asymptomatic women who had potential risk for congenital abnormalities in their fetuses; (3) use of retrospective data; (4) the lack of follow-up data may also underestimate the prevalence since there is a possibility of postnatal signs and symptoms [32,33].
The chance of congenital microcephaly or CNS abnormalities exposed to ZIKV is inversely proportional to the trimester in which the infection occurs [10,34,35,36,37,38]. As seen in other congenital infections, where infections in the first trimester confer a greater risk of congenital CNS injuries, ZIKV infection appears to result in a greater extent of cell loss in both placental and fetal tissues. Histopathological findings in fatal cases in fetuses with microcephaly and a maternal history of ZIKV infection during the first trimester include edema of the villi, an increase in the number of Hofbauer cells, besides the presence of antigens in the chorionic villi and necrotic fetal nerve cells or degeneration process, as well as in glial cells [39,40]. The presence of neuronal necrosis suggests a process of continuous cell injury, which could include the period of maternal infection and subsequent injuries to the developing brain [39]. The loss of nerve cells in the early stages of CNS development can result in less brain volume and impair the formation of cortical gyri [41,42]. A recently published Brazilian cohort showed a greater chance of developmental abnormalities between three and five months of age in pregnant women with ZIKV infection occurring during the first trimester [32]. The lower odds ratio found in the first trimester compared to the second may be related to the higher prevalence of outcomes in negative ZIKV pregnant women, possibly caused by other possible infections, environmental factors, or even abnormalities of genetic origin.
Laboratory confirmation of CZS is more challenging since the duration of viremia and viruria and whether viremia is constant or intermittent is still unknown, especially in those infected in the first trimester of pregnancy. These could explain the significant variation in ZIKV RT-PCR's positivity in different body fluids (blood, urine, and liquor) in other cohorts, ranging from no positive tests to 65% positivity [10,35,38,43,44,45]. The serology of newborns for ZIKV in the postnatal period, confirmed by the PRNT (Plaque Reduction Neutralization Test), seems to have a sensitivity which varies from 7.1 to 90.5% [46,47,48] and can be influenced by the time of its realization, with a considerable reduction after the first month of life [46]. The fetal immune response to ZIKV may be similar to other congenital infections, such as rubella and CMV, which have a more cellular and less humoral immune response [45].
The predominant intracranial calcifications, ventriculomegaly, reduced brain volume, and cortical defects (lissencephaly and pachygyria) are also described by other authors [49,50]. Intracranial calcifications due to CZS are typically located in the subcortical regions. Still, recent reports show other potential sites such as infratentorial, base nuclei, periventricular region, and the cortex itself [51]. Ventriculomegaly was a common finding among our CZS cases but even more prevalent among those born from women without laboratory evidence of ZIKV infection. Only 5% of congenital ventriculomegaly cases are secondary to congenital infections such as CMV, toxoplasmosis, and ZIKV [52]; therefore, the higher frequency may represent a result of other non-infectious etiologies.
The most common ophthalmological findings in CZS are pigmentary abnormalities and chorioretinal atrophy, similar to congenital toxoplasmosis [53]. Approximately 34 to 55% of children with CZS with microcephaly have at least one ophthalmic abnormality [54]. Despite the low number of ophthalmic exams, 55.5% were abnormal: optic nerve hypoplasia, incomplete vascularization, and pigmentary abnormalities. Despite not being the most common finding, Optic nerve hypoplasia has been described by some authors [54,55]. Other etiologies should be considered in those negative cases of ZIKV, such as other congenital infections (CMV and toxoplasmosis) or genetic and metabolic diseases [56,57]. Incomplete vascularization was described in a premature newborn since complete retinal vascularization occurs only at around 40 to 42 weeks of gestation [58].
Regarding auditory abnormalities, we observed that newborns exposed to ZIKV presented a higher frequency of abnormalities than those not exposed (33.3 vs 16.6%). Children exposed to ZIKV show wide variation in its frequency, whereas abnormalities in otoacoustic emissions vary from 0 to 75%, while BAEPs (Brainstem Auditory Evoked Potentials) vary from 0 to 29.2% [59]. Traditionally, other congenital infections (CMV and rubella) and genetic abnormalities are the leading causes of congenital hearing loss [60].
Arthrogryposis has also been described by other authors [61,62,63,64]. Approximately 80% of congenital arthrogryposis have a neurogenic origin, either due to abnormalities in the formation, structure, or function of central and peripheral nervous systems [61]. Imaging and electroneuromyography studies have demonstrated this involvement of both nervous systems, with a volumetric reduction of the anterior medullary tracts in children with CZS, reducing fetal mobility and, consequently, causing deformities [63,65].
Our study's strengths should be highlighted: large population sample, ZIKV infection in pregnant women confirmed by ZIKV RT-PCR, control group, an extensive search for potential covariates, use of multivariate analysis, and comprehensive review of all cases. Some limiting points are: (1) use of retrospective data; (2) lack of information in a part of the sample, including serologic tests for dengue, chikungunya, CMV, toxoplasmosis, rubella, herpes; (3) lack of complementary exams among the identified cases; (5) most of the pregnant women with ZIKV infection were symptomatic; therefore, we are not sure with our results can be extrapolated to all pregnant women (symptomatic and asymptomatic).

5. Conclusions

It is essential to highlight that ZIKV infection can lead to a spectrum of structural or functional anomalies. As there is no specific treatment for CZS, assistance should be focused on monitoring neurological, motor, auditory, visual, and orthopedic disorders in all children intrauterine exposed to ZIKV, regardless of the identification of congenital anomalies in the prenatal period, especially to those exposed during the first and the second trimesters of pregnancy. ZIKV infections are still endemic in some countries globally, including Brazil, reinforcing the preventive measures and continuous monitoring of potential fetal anomalies.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.M.M., R.A.M., A.P.B., and A.J.C.; methodology, M.M.M.; software, C.E.R.; validation, M.M.M., R.A.M., A.P.B., and A.J.C.; formal analysis, C.E.R.; investigation, M.M.M.; resources, A.P.B.; data curation, M.M.M.; writing—original draft preparation, M.M.M.; writing—review, editing, and supervision, R.A.M., A.P.B., and A.J.C.; project administration, M.M.M. and A.P.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Research Ethics Committee of Federal University of Rio de Janeiro Maternity School Hospital (protocol code 2.622.599, Institutional Review Board number 87402618.3.0000.5275, date of approval 26-APR-2018).

Informed Consent Statement

Patient consent was waived as this was retrospective research using an anonymized database.

Data Availability Statement

In our study, we used five databases: GAL, FORMSUS, RESP, SINASC, and SIM, all provided by the Rio de Janeiro State Health Department. Data may be made available upon reasonable request by the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the Health Department of the state of Rio de Janeiro for making the data available and allowing this study to be carried out.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
BAEP Brainstem Auditory Evoked Potentials
CI Confidence interval
CNS Central Nervous System
CZS Congenital Zika Syndrome
FORMSUS Formulário do Sistema Único de Saúde (Unified Health System Form)
GAL Gerenciador de Ambiente Laboratorial (Laboratory Environment Manager)
IQR Interquartile range
OR Odds ratio
PRNT Plaque Reduction Neutralization Test
R2 R squared
RESP Registro de Eventos em Saúde Pública (Public Health Events Registry)
RT-PCR Real-time reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction
SIM Sistema de Informações sobre Mortalidade (Mortality Information System)
SINASC Sistema de Informações sobre Nascidos Vivos (Live Birth Information System)
ZIKV Zika virus

References

  1. Cauchemez S, Besnard M, Bompard P, et al. Association between Zika virus and microcephaly in French Polynesia, 2013-15: a retrospective study. Lancet 2016, 387, 2125–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. de Oliveira WK, de França GVA, Carmo EH, et al. Infection-related microcephaly after the 2015 and 2016 Zika virus outbreaks in Brazil: a surveillance-based analysis. Lancet 2017, 390, 861–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. de Magalhaes-Barbosa MC, Prata-Barbosa A, Robaina JR, et al. prevalence of microcephaly in eight south-eastern and midwestern Brazilian neonatal intensive care units: 2011-2015. Arch Dis Child 2017, 102, 728–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Pan American Health Organization. Zika cases and congenital syndrome associated with Zika virus reported by countries and territories in the Americas, 2015–2018: Cumulative cases – Data as of 4 January 2018. Available online: https://www.paho.org/en/node/60231 (accessed on 23 Dec 2024).
  5. Musso D, Ko AI, Baud D. Zika Virus Infection — After the Pandemic. N Engl J Med 2019, 381, 1444–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Grubaugh ND, Saraf S, Gangavarapu K, et al. Travel Surveillance and Genomics Uncover a Hidden Zika Outbreak during the Waning Epidemic. Cell 2019, 178, 1057–1071.e11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Haby MM, Pinart M, Elias V, et al. Systematic Systematic reviews prevalence of asymptomatic Zika virus infection : a systematic review. Bull World Health Organ 2018, 96, 402–413D. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Guanche Garcell H, Gutiérrez García F, Ramirez Nodal M, et al. Clinical relevance of Zika symptoms in the context of a Zika Dengue epidemic. J Infect Public Health 2020, 13, 173–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Tozetto-Mendoza TR, Avelino-Silva VI, Fonseca S, et al. Zika virus infection among symptomatic patients from two healthcare centers in Sao Paulo State, Brazil: Prevalence, clinical characteristics, viral detection in body fluids and serodynamics. Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo 2019, 61, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Sousa IBA de, Souza C, Barbosa M dos S, et al. Gestational outcomes in women infected by Zika virus during pregnancy in Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil: A cross-sectional study. Int J Infect Dis 2020, 98, 359–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Brasil P, Calvet GA, Siqueira AM, et al. Zika Virus Outbreak in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Clinical Characterization, Epidemiological and Virological Aspects. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 2016, 10, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Conners EE, Lee EH, Thompson CN, et al. Zika virus infection among pregnant women and their neonates in New York City, January 2016–June 2017. Obstet Gynecol 2018, 132, 487–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Halai UA, Nielsen-Saines K, Moreira ML, et al. Maternal Zika virus disease severity, virus load, prior dengue antibodies, and their relationship to birth outcomes. Clin Infect Dis 2017, 65, 877–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Hoen B, Schaub B, Funk AL, et al. Pregnancy Outcomes after ZIKV Infection in French Territories in the Americas. N Engl J Med 2018, 378, 985–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Mulkey SB, Bulas DI, Vezina G, et al. Sequential Neuroimaging of the Fetus and Newborn with In Utero Zika Virus Exposure. JAMA Pediatr 2019, 173, 52–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Pomar L, Malinger G, Benoist G, et al. Association between Zika virus and fetopathy: a prospective cohort study in French Guiana. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2017, 49, 729–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Rodriguez-Morales AJ, Cardona-Ospina JA, Ramirez-Jaramillo V, et al. Diagnosis and outcomes of pregnant women with Zika virus infection in two municipalities of Risaralda, Colombia: Second report of the ZIKERNCOL study. Travel Med Infect Dis 2018, 25, 20–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Braga JU, Bressan C, Dalvi APR, et al. Accuracy of Zika virus disease case definition during simultaneous Dengue and Chikungunya epidemics. PLoS One 2017, 12, e0179725–e0179725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Mitchell PK, Mier-y-Teran-Romero L, Biggerstaff BJ, et al. Reassessing Serosurvey-Based Estimates of the Symptomatic Proportion of Zika Virus Infections. Am J Epidemiol 2018, 188, 206–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Meneses J do A, Ishigami AC, de Mello LM, et al. Lessons Learned at the Epicenter of Brazil’s Congenital Zika Epidemic: Evidence From 87 Confirmed Cases. Clin Infect Dis 2017, 64, 1302–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Vianna RA de O, Rua EC, Fernandes AR, et al. Experience in diagnosing congenital Zika syndrome in Brazilian children born to asymptomatic mothers. Acta Trop 2020, 206, 105438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. UK Health Security Agency, England. Guidance on the investigation, diagnosis and management of viral illness (plus syphilis), or exposure to viral rash illness, in pregnancy. Available online: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/66a90597a3c2a28abb50d9f6/viral-rash-in-pregnancy-guidance-syphilis-august-2024.pdf (accessed on 23 Dec 2024).
  23. Pan American Health Organization. Tool for the diagnosis and care of patients with suspected arboviral diseases. Washington D.C., PAHO 2017. Available online: https://iris.paho.org/handle/10665.2/33895 (accessed on 23 Dec 2024).
  24. Arragain L, Dupont-Rouzeyrol M, O’Connor O, et al. Vertical Transmission of Dengue Virus in the Peripartum Period and Viral Kinetics in Newborns and Breast Milk: New Data. J Pediatric Infect Dis Soc 2017, 6, 324–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Yang, HM. The transovarial transmission in the dynamics of dengue infection: Epidemiological implications and thresholds. Math Biosci 2017, 286, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Contopoulos-Ioannidis D, Newman-Lindsay S, Chow C, et al. Mother-to-child transmission of Chikungunya virus: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 2018, 12, e0006510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Charlier C, Beaudoin M-C, Couderc T, et al. Arboviruses and pregnancy: maternal, fetal, and neonatal effects. Lancet Child Adolesc Health 2017, 1, 134–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Ramful D, Carbonnier M, Pasquet M, et al. Mother-to-child transmission of Chikungunya virus infection. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2007, 26, 811–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Gérardin P, Sampériz S, Ramful D, et al. Neurocognitive outcome of children exposed to perinatal mother-to-child Chikungunya virus infection: the CHIMERE cohort study on Reunion Island. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 2014, 8, e2996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Campos Coelho AV, Crovella S. Microcephaly prevalence in infants born to zika virus-infected women: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Mol Sci 2017, 18, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Nithiyanantham SF, Badawi A. Maternal infection with Zika virus and prevalence of congenital disorders in infants: systematic review and meta-analysis. Can J Public Health 2019, 110, 638–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Einspieler C, Utsch F, Brasil P, et al. Association of Infants Exposed to Prenatal Zika Virus Infection with Their Clinical, Neurologic, and Developmental Status Evaluated via the General Movement Assessment Tool. JAMA Netw Open 2019, 2, e187235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Mulkey SB, Arroyave-Wessel M, Peyton C, et al. Neurodevelopmental Abnormalities in Children with In Utero Zika Virus Exposure Without Congenital Zika Syndrome. JAMA Pediatr 2020, 174, 269–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Aspilcueta Gho. D, Benites Villafane C, Calderón Sánchez M, et al. Infección por zika en el Perú: de amenaza a problema de salud. Rev Peru Ginecol y Obstet 2017, 63, 57–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Honein MA, Dawson AL, Petersen EE, et al. Birth defects among fetuses and infants of US women with evidence of possible zika virus infection during pregnancy. JAMA, 2017, 317, 59–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Mendez N, Oviedo-Pastrana M, Mattar S, et al. Zika virus disease, microcephaly and Guillain-Barre syndrome in Colombia: epidemiological situation during 21 months of the Zika virus outbreak, 2015-2017. Arch Public Health 2017, 75, 65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Ocampo Cañas JA, Caviedes Combita D, Molina Leon HF, et al. Patient characteristics and pregnancy outcomes among Zika-infected pregnant women: Epidemiologic surveillance data from two cities in Colombia, 2015–2016. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2020, 148, 4–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Coutinho CM, Negrini S, Araujo D, et al. Early maternal Zika infection predicts severe neonatal neurological damage: results from the prospective Natural History of Zika Virus Infection in Gestation cohort study. BJOG 2020, 128, 317–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Martines RB, Bhatnagar J, de Oliveira Ramos AM, et al. Pathology of congenital Zika syndrome in Brazil: a case series. Lancet 2016, 388, 898–904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Tang H, Hammack C, Ogden SC, et al. Zika Virus Infects Human Cortical Neural Progenitors and Attenuates Their Growth. Cell Stem Cell 2016, 18, 587–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Gilmore EC, Walsh CA. Genetic causes of microcephaly and lessons for neuronal development. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Dev Biol 2013, 2, 461–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Garcez PP, Loiola EC, Da Costa RM, et al. Zika virus: Zika virus impairs growth in human neurospheres and brain organoids. Science 2016, 352, 816–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Reynolds MR, Jones AM, Petersen EE, et al. Vital Signs: Update on Zika Virus–Associated Birth Defects and Evaluation of All U.S. Infants with Congenital Zika Virus Exposure - U.S. Zika Pregnancy Registry, 2016. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2017, 66, 366–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Rice ME, Galang RR, Roth NM, et al. Vital Signs: Zika-Associated Birth Defects and Neurodevelopmental Abnormalities Possibly Associated with Congenital Zika Virus Infection - U.S. Territories and Freely Associated States, 2018. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2018, 67, 858–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Brasil P, Vasconcelos Z, Kerin T, et al. Zika virus vertical transmission in children with confirmed antenatal exposure. Nat Commun 2020, 11, 3510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Venturi G, Fortuna C, Alves RM, et al. Epidemiological and clinical suspicion of congenital Zika virus infection: Serological findings in mothers and children from Brazil. J Med Virol 2019, 91, 1577–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Cordeiro MT, Brito CAA, Pena LJ, et al. Results of a Zika Virus (ZIKV) Immunoglobulin M-Specific Diagnostic Assay Are Highly Correlated With Detection of Neutralizing Anti-ZIKV Antibodies in Neonates With Congenital Disease. J Infect Dis 2016, 214, 1897–904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. de Araujo TVB, Ximenes RA de A, Miranda-Filho D de B, et al. Association between microcephaly, Zika virus infection, and other risk factors in Brazil: final report of a case-control study. Lancet Infect Dis 2018, 18, 328–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Radaelli G, Lahorgue Nunes M, Bernardi Soder R, et al. Review of neuroimaging findings in congenital Zika virus syndrome and its relation to the time of infection. Neuroradiol J 2020, 33, 152–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Sanders Pereira Pinto P, de Almeida TM, Monteiro L, et al. Brain abnormalities on neuroimaging in Children with Congenital Zika Syndrome in Salvador, Brazil, and its possible implications on neuropsychological development. Int Soc Dev Neurosci 2020, 80, 189–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Niemeyer B, Hollanda R, Muniz B, et al. What We Can Find Beyond the Classic Neuroimaging Findings of Congenital Zika Virus Syndrome? Eur Neurol 2020, 83, 17–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Fox NS, Monteagudo A, Kuller JA, et al. Mild fetal ventriculomegaly: diagnosis, evaluation, and management. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2018, 219, B2–B9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Peloggia A, Ali M, Nanda K, et al. Zika virus exposure in pregnancy and its association with newborn visual anomalies and hearing loss. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2018, 143, 277–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Fernandez MP, Parra Saad E, Ospina Martinez M, et al. Ocular Histopathologic Features of Congenital Zika Syndrome. JAMA Ophthalmol 2017, 135, 1163–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. de Paula Freitas B, de Oliveira Dias JR, Prazeres J, et al. Ocular Findings in Infants with Microcephaly Associated with Presumed Zika Virus Congenital Infection in Salvador, Brazil. JAMA Ophthalmol 2016, 134, 529–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Marquezan MC, Ventura C V, Sheffield JS, et al. Ocular effects of Zika virus - a review. Surv Ophthalmol 2018, 63, 166–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. de Vries, LS. Viral Infections and the Neonatal Brain. Semin Pediatr Neurol 2019, 32, 100769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. O’Connor AR, Wilson CM, Fielder AR. Ophthalmological problems associated with preterm birth. Eye 2007, 21, 1254–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Barbosa MH de M, Magalhães-Barbosa MC de, Robaina JR, et al. Auditory findings associated with Zika virus infection: an integrative review. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2019, 85, 642–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Korver AMH, Smith RJH, Van Camp G, et al. Congenital hearing loss. Nat Rev Dis Prim 2017, 3, 16094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Serpa SC, de Melo ACMG, Gomes Lins O, et al. Orthopedic findings in arthrogryposis and congenital Zika syndrome: A case series. Birth Defects Res 2020, 112, 385–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Schuler-Faccini L, Ribeiro EM, Feitosa IML, et al. Possible Association Between Zika Virus Infection and Microcephaly — Brazil, 2015. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2016, 65, 59–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. van der Linden V, Filho ELR, Lins OG, et al. Congenital Zika syndrome with arthrogryposis: retrospective case series study. BMJ 2016, 354, i3899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Chimelli L, Moura Pone S, Avvad-Portari E, et al. Persistence of Zika Virus After Birth: Clinical, Virological, Neuroimaging, and Neuropathological Documentation in a 5-Month Infant with Congenital Zika Syndrome. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol 2018, 77, 193–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Chimelli L, Avvad-Portari E. Congenital Zika virus infection: a neuropathological review. Child’s Nerv Syst 2017, 34, 95–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. Signs and symptoms in ZIKV+ e ZIKV- pregnant women.
Table 1. Signs and symptoms in ZIKV+ e ZIKV- pregnant women.
Signs and symptoms ZIKV+
n (%)
ZIKV-
n (%)
p-value1
Rash 1899 (83.7) 4477 (79.9) 0.0001
Pruritus 1391 (61.3) 2656 (47.4) <0.001
Headache 636 (28.0) 1943 (34.7) <0.001
Arthralgia 596 (26.3) 2196 (39.2) <0.001
Myalgia 476 (20.1) 1670 (29.8) <0.001
Fever 379 (16.7) 1862 (33.2) <0.001
Retro-ocular pain 322 (14.2) 835 (14.9) 0.1164
Conjunctival hyperemia 195 (8.6) 414 (7.4) 0.2216
Edema 187 (8.2) 552 (9.6) 0.0053
Conjunctivitis 90 (4.0) 210 (3.7) 0.9846
Coryza 68 (3.6) 237 (5.3) 0.0041
Cough 79 (3.5) 236 (4.2) 0.0704
Diarrhea 127 (3.0) 337 (6.0) 0.2595
Lymphadenomegaly 49 (2.2) 107 (1.9) 0.718
1 Chi-square test.
Table 2. Prevalence of outcomes in pregnant women ZIKV+ and ZIKV- (total and in different trimesters).
Table 2. Prevalence of outcomes in pregnant women ZIKV+ and ZIKV- (total and in different trimesters).
ZIKV+ ZIKV- p-value1
Pregnant women 2269 5601
Outcomes 49 44 <0.001
Prevalence 2.6% 0.78%
1st trimester
Pregnant women 508 1 205
Outcomes 28 19 <0.001
Prevalence 5.5% 1.6%
2nd trimester
Pregnant women 997 1 941
Outcomes 15 7 0.0015
Prevalence 1.5% 0.36%
3rd trimester
Pregnant women 764 2 455
Outcomes 6 18 1.0
Prevalence 0.79% 0.73%
1 Chi-square test.
Table 3. Maternal characteristics in ZIKV+ and ZIKV- pregnant women.
Table 3. Maternal characteristics in ZIKV+ and ZIKV- pregnant women.
ZIKV+
n (%)
ZIKV-
n (%)
p-value1
Total 2269 5601
Age [median (IQR)] 26 (21-31) 26 (21-31) 0.233*
Ethnicity/race
White 945 (44.6) 2197 (42.8) 0.168
Others 1176 (55.4) 2937 (57.2)
Missing 148 467
Place of residence
Not urban 352 (15.5) 765 (13.7) < 0.001
Urban 1917 (84.5) 4836 (86.3)
Marital status
Single 1019 (70.0) 2398 (72.2) 0.402
Married 411 (28.2) 872 (26.3)
Widowed 3 (0.2) 4 (0.1)
Divorced 23 (1.6) 46 (1.4)
Prevalence 1.5% 0.36%
Missing 148 467
Education
Elementary school 289 (19.4) 627 (18.4) 0.331
High school 980 (65.6) 2219 (65.0)
Higher school 224 (15.0) 566 (16.6)
Missing 776 2189
Twin pregnancy
No 1501 (99.1) 3413 (98.7) 0.181
Yes 13 (0.9) 45 (1.3)
Missing 755 2143
Type of labor
Natural 668 (44.1) 1596 (46.2) 0.179
Cesarean section 847 (55.9) 1862 (53.8)
Missing 754 2143
Prenatal consultations
≥ 6 1295 (86.9) 2920 (85.8) 0.318
<6 196 (13.1) 484 (14.2)
Missing 778 2 197
Need for hospitalization
No 1686 (98) 3810 (97.6) 0.388
Yes 35 (2) 94 (2.4)
Missing 548 1 697
Percentages for all categories were calculated with the exclusion of those with missing data from the denominator. The “missing” category was not included as a category when the p-value was estimated. IQR: Interquartile range. 1 Chi-square test, except for the one labeled with an asterisk (*), which used Fisher’s exact test.
Table 4. Average effect of exposure to ZIKV during pregnancy on the outcome congenital microcephaly or CNS abnormalities in a logistic regression model weighted by the propensity score.
Table 4. Average effect of exposure to ZIKV during pregnancy on the outcome congenital microcephaly or CNS abnormalities in a logistic regression model weighted by the propensity score.
Predictors OR 95% CI p-value
Exposure to ZIKV during pregnancy 2.46 1.30-4.64 0.005
Observations: 3463 pregnant women
R2 / R2 adjusted: 0.017/0.017
Exposure to ZIKV during 1st trimester 4.29 1.93-9.53 <0.001
Observations: 915 pregnant women
R2 / R2 adjusted: 0.049/0.047
Exposure to ZIKV during 2nd trimester 5.29 1.08-25.95 0.040
Observations: 1793 pregnant women
R2 / R2 adjusted: 0.042/0.042
Exposure to ZIKV during 3rd trimester
Observations: 915 pregnant womenR2 / R2 adjusted: 0.049/0.047
0.68 0.21-2.14 0.506
Table 5. Characteristics of cases of congenital microcephaly or CNS abnormalities from mothers ZIKV+ and ZIKV-.
Table 5. Characteristics of cases of congenital microcephaly or CNS abnormalities from mothers ZIKV+ and ZIKV-.
ZIKV+
n (%)
ZIKV-
n (%)
p-value1
Total 49 44
Maternal age [median (IQR)] 25 (21-29) 23 (20-31) 0.600
Place of residence
Not urban 40 (81.6) 36 (81.8) 0.982*
Urban 9 (18.4) 8 (18.2)
Maternal ethnicity/race
White 18 (40) 17 (39.5)
Others 27 (60) 25 (60.5) 0.014**
Missing 1 4
Fetus/newborn sex
Female 22 (47.8) 27 (67.5) 0.066
Male 24 (52.2) 13 (32.5)
Missing 3 4
Newborn birth length
cm [median (IQR)] 45 (43,2-47,8) 47 (44-48) 0.505**
Newborn birth weight
g [median (IQR)] 2640 (2402.5-2902.5) 2637.5 (2120-2957.5) 0.996**
Newborn head circumference
cm [median (IQR)] 30 (28-31) 29.2 (28-30,1) 0.460**
Prematurity
No 36 (83.7) 37 (84.1) 0.164*
Yes 3 (7) 4 (9.1)
Not applicable 4 (9.3) 3 (6.8)
Twinning
No 49 (100) 44 (100) 1*
Yes 0 0
Percentages for all categories were calculated with the exclusion of those with missing data from the denominator. The “missing” category was not included as a category when the p-value was estimated. IQR: Interquartile range. 1 Chi-square test, except for those labeled with an asterisk (*), which used Fisher’s exact test, and those labeled with two asterisks, which used Mann-Whitney U test.
Table 6. Maternal symptoms in cases of congenital microcephaly or CNS abnormalities from mothers ZIKV+ and ZIKV-.
Table 6. Maternal symptoms in cases of congenital microcephaly or CNS abnormalities from mothers ZIKV+ and ZIKV-.
ZIKV+
n (%)
ZIKV-
n (%)
p-value1
Total 49 44
Fever
Yes 6 (12.2) 12 (27.3) 0.067
No 43 (87.8) 32 (72.7)
Rash
Yes 46 (93.9) 35 (79.5) 0.04
No 3 (6.1) 9 (20.5)
Arthralgia
Yes 16 (32.7) 16 (36.4) 0.707
No 33 (67.3) 28 (63.6)
Headache
Yes 14 (28.6) 15 (34.1) 0.566
No 35 (71.4) 29 (65.9)
Conjunctivitis
Yes 3 (6.1) 1 (2.3) 0.619
No 46 (93.9) 43 (97.7)
Coryza
Yes 1 (2) 4 (9.1) 0.186
No 48 (98) 40 (90.9)
Diarrhea
Yes 4 (8.2) 2 (4.5) 0.68
No 45 (91.8) 42 (95.5)
Retro-ocular pain
Yes 7 (14.3) 5 (11,4) 0.675
No 42 (85.7) 39 (88.6)
Edema
Yes 2 (4.1) 5 (11.4) 0.249
No 47 (95.9) 39 (88.6)
Myalgia
Yes 14 (28.6) 10 (22.7) 0.52
No 35 (71.4) 34 (77.3)
Lymphadenomegaly
Yes 2 (4.1) 0 0.496
No 47 (95.9) 44 (100)
Pruritus
Yes 33 (67.3) 20 (45.5) 0.033
No 16 (32.7) 24 (54.5)
Cough
Yes 0 1 (2.3) 0.473
No 49 (100) 43 (97.7)
Fetal loss
Yes 4 (9.1) 5 (10.2) 1*
No 40 (90.9) 44 (89.8)
Percentages for all categories were calculated with the exclusion of those with missing data from the denominator. The “missing” category was not included as a category when the p-value was estimated. 1 Chi-square test, except for those labeled with an asterisk (*), which used Fisher’s exact test.
Table 7. CNS abnormalities, physical examination, and ophthalmologic exam findings in cases ZIKV+ and ZIKV-.
Table 7. CNS abnormalities, physical examination, and ophthalmologic exam findings in cases ZIKV+ and ZIKV-.
ZIKV+
n (%)
ZIKV-
n (%)
p-value1
Total 49 44
CNS abnormalities:
Intracranial calcifications 26 (74.3) 15 (75) 1
Ventriculomegaly 23 (65.7) 19 (95) 0.033
Posterior fossa malformations 6 (17.1) 5 (25) 0.723
Reduced brain volume 6 (17.1) 4 (20) 1
Corpus callosum malformations 6 (17.1) 3 (15) 1
Cortex dysplasia 6 (17.1) 1 (5) 0.379
Lissencephaly 4 (11.4) 3 (15) 1
Pachygyria 3 (8.6) 1 (5) 1
Hydrops fetalis 1 (2.9) 0 1
Cystic hygroma + encephalocele 0 1 (5) 0.775
Semilobar holoprosencephaly 0 1 (5) 0.775
Physical examination findings:
Arthrogryposis 4 (8.2) 0 0.154
Congenital foot deformities 1 (2) 1 (2.3) 1
Esophageal atresia 1 (2) 0 1
Cleft lip and palate 0 1 (2.3) 0.957
Myelomeningocele 0 1 (2.3) 0.957
Ophthalmologic examination:
Optic nerve hypoplasia 4 (44.4) 3 (30) 0.514
Incomplete vascularization 1 (11.1) 0 0.279
Pigmentary abnormalities 2 (22.2) 0 0.115
Retinal coloboma 0 2 (20) 0.156
Chorioretinal atrophy 0 1 (10) 0.329
Chorioretinitis 0 1 (10) 0.329
Microphthalmia 0 1 (10) 0.329
Percentages for all categories were calculated with the exclusion of those with missing data from the denominator. The “missing” category was not included as a category when the p-value was estimated. 1 Chi-square test.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
Prerpints.org logo

Preprints.org is a free preprint server supported by MDPI in Basel, Switzerland.

Subscribe

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

Privacy Settings

© 2026 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated