Evidence Hub

Factors affecting the incidence of congenital anomaly of the kidney and urinary tract: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Gusti Ngurah P. Pradnya Wisnu, G. R. Situmorang, I. Wahyudi, A. Rodjani, Reza Fahlevi, P. Raharja

Early Human Development, 2025

838 participants · 4 citations

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Congenital anomaly of kidney and urinary tract (CAKUT) is one of the most common congenital anomalies, occurring in over 1 % of live births and accounting for 40-50 % of chronic kidney failure cases in children. The prevalence of CAKUT was multifaceted and varies widely. This study aimed to report the latest evidence of incidence, trends, and risk factors associated with the incidence of CAKUT.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, and Proquest databases. The included studies were then assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa (NOS) risk of bias tools. Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager version 5.4.1 software and presented as pooled incidence and Odds Ratio (OR) with a 95 % confidence interval.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Eight studies in total were included from 2004 to 2022 (12.838 infants with CAKUT of all ages). NOS risk of bias tools indicated all studies had low risk of bias. The overall pooled incidence of CAKUT was 13,6 per 1000 births (95 % CI: 4 to 45,7 per 1000 births) in all infants and 4,9 per 1000 births (95 % CI: 1,1 to 21,3 per 1000 births) in term infants without congenital anomalies, with an increasing trend over the years. Factors, such as sex (boys) (OR = 1,53; 95 % CI 1,26-1,86), prematurity (OR = 1,46; 95 % CI 1,27-1,67), low birth weight (OR = 1,28; 95 % CI 1,10-1,48), maternal diabetes (OR = 1,81; 95 % CI 1,43-2,28), maternal obesity (OR = 1,45; 95 % CI 1,23-1,70), and maternal age (>40 years)…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 838 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free