Viruses and other infections in stillbirth: what is the evidence and what should we be doing?

In Australia, as in other developed countries, approximately 40-50% of stillbirths are of unknown aetiology. Emerging evidence suggests stillbirths are often multifactorial. The absence of a known cause leads to uncertainty regarding the risk of recurrence, which can cause extreme anguish for parents that may manifest as guilt, anger or bewilderment. Further, clinical endeavours to prevent recurrences in future pregnancies are impaired by lack of a defined aetiology. Therefore, efforts to provide an aetiological diagnosis of stillbirth impact upon all aspects of care of the mother, and inform many parts of clinical decision making. Despite the magnitude of the problem, that is 7 stillbirths per 1000 births in Australia, diagnostic efforts to discover viral aetiologies are often minimal. Viruses and other difficult to culture organisms have been postulated as the aetiology of a number of obstetric and paediatric conditions of unknown cause, including stillbirth. Reasons forwarded for testing stillbirth cases for infectious agents are non-medical factors, including addressing all parents' need for diagnostic closure, identifying infectious agents as a sporadic cause of stillbirth to reassure parents and clinicians regarding risk for future pregnancies, and to reduce unnecessary testing. It is clear that viral agents including rubella, human cytomegalovirus (CMV), parvovirus B19, herpes simplex virus (HSV), lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV), and varicella zoster virus (VZV) may cause intrauterine deaths. Evidence for many other agents is that minimal or asymptomatic infections also occur, so improved markers of adverse outcomes are needed. The role of other viruses and difficult-to-culture organisms in stillbirth is uncertain, and needs more research. However, testing stillborn babies for some viral agents remains a useful adjunct to histopathological and other examinations at autopsy. Modern molecular techniques such as multiplex PCR, allow searches for multiple agents. Now that such testing is available, it is important to assess the clinical usefulness of such testing.