Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2017 Apr 25;81(5):629-634.
doi: 10.1253/circj.CJ-16-1343. Epub 2017 Apr 1.

The Complex Genetic Basis of Congenital Heart Defects

Affiliations
Review

The Complex Genetic Basis of Congenital Heart Defects

Ehiole Akhirome et al. Circ J. .

Abstract

Twenty years ago, chromosomal abnormalities were the only identifiable genetic causes of a small fraction of congenital heart defects (CHD). Today, a de novo or inherited genetic abnormality can be identified as pathogenic in one-third of cases. We refer to them here as monogenic causes, insofar as the genetic abnormality has a readily detectable, large effect. What explains the other two-thirds? This review considers a complex genetic basis. That is, a combination of genetic mutations or variants that individually may have little or no detectable effect contribute to the pathogenesis of a heart defect. Genes in the embryo that act directly in cardiac developmental pathways have received the most attention, but genes in the mother that establish the gestational milieu via pathways related to metabolism and aging also have an effect. A growing body of evidence highlights the pathogenic significance of genetic interactions in the embryo and maternal effects that have a genetic basis. The investigation of CHD as guided by a complex genetic model could help estimate risk more precisely and logically lead to a means of prevention.

Keywords: Congenital heart defects; Genetics; Maternal age; Maternal effects; Modifier genes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure
Figure
The vast majority of the known causes of congenital heart defects (CHD) are de novo or inherited genetic abnormalities. A monogenic basis can be identified in one-third of all cases. The Baltimore-Washington Infant Study and Metropolitan Atlanta Congenital Defects Program yielded similar estimates for the fraction attributable to chromosomal syndromes., De novo copy number variants (CNVs) include both the well-known, such as the 22q11.2 deletion, and more recently discovered ones. The fraction attributable to de novo mutations that affect protein-coding sequence were recently reported in 3 large, whole-exome sequencing studies of trios. The burden of inherited loss-of-function mutations of known CHD genes was estimated in one of these studies. Inherited CNVs and other forms of genetic mutation cause monogenic CHD, but their attributable fractions have not been quantified in large studies similar to the ones cited above. An oligogenic basis may explain a large fraction of the currently unknown causes.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Newman JR. The world of mathematics. London: George Allen and Unwin; 1956. [November 1, 2016]. Commentary on Gregor Mendel; pp. 932–936. https://archive.org/details/TheWorldOfMathematicsVolume2.
    1. Peacock TB. On malformations of the human heart. London: John Churchill and Sons; 1866. [November 1, 2016]. pp. 101–166. https://archive.org/details/onmalformationso00peac.
    1. Nora JJ. Multifactorial inheritance hypothesis for the etiology of congenital heart diseases: The genetic-environmental interaction. Circulation. 1968;38:604–617. - PubMed
    1. Ferencz C, Neill CA, Boughman JA, Rubin JD, Brenner JI, Perry LW. Congenital cardiovascular malformations associated with chromosome abnormalities: An epidemiologic study. J Pedialr. 1989;114:79–86. - PubMed
    1. Hartman RJ, Rasmussen SA, Botto LD, Riehle-Colarusso T, Martin CL, Cragan JD, et al. The contribution of chromosomal abnormalities to congenital heart defects: A population-based study. Pediatr Cardiol. 2011;32:1147–1157. - PubMed