Stillbirth risk by fetal size among 126.5 million births in 15 countries from 2000 to 2020: A fetuses‐at‐risk approach

• Autores: Okwaraji, Yemisrach B.; Suárez Idueta, Lorena; Ohuma, Eric O.; Bradley, Ellen; Yargawa, Judith; Pingray, Veronica; Cormick, Gabriela; Gordon, Adrienne; Flenady, Vicki; Horváth Puhó, Erzsébet; Sørensen, Henrik Toft; Abuladze, Liili; Heidarzadeh, Mohammed; Khalili, Narjes; Yunis, Khalid A.; Al Bizri, Ayah; Barranco, Arturo; van Dijk, Aimée E.; Broeders, Lisa; Alyafei, Fawzya; Olukade, Tawa O.; Razaz, Neda; Söderling, Jonas; Smith, Lucy K.; Matthews, Ruth J.; Wood, Rachael; Monteath, Kirsten; Pereyra, Isabel; Pravia, Gabriella; Lisonkova, Sarka; Wen, Qi; Lawn, Joy E.; Blencowe, Hannah
• Año de publicación: 2024
• Idioma: inglés
• Tipo de recurso: artículo
• Materia: gestational age; Preterm birth; stillbirth; size
• Institución: Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas

Objective: To compare stillbirth rates and risks for small for gestational age (SGA), large for gestational age (LGA) and appropriate for gestational age (AGA) pregnancies at 24-44 completed weeks of gestation using a birth-based and fetuses-at-risk approachs.Design: Population-based, multi-country study.Setting: National data systems in 15 high- and middle-income countries.Population: Live births and stillbirths.Methods: A total of 151 country-years of data, including 126 543 070 births across 15 countries from 2000 to 2020, were compiled. Births were categorised into SGA, AGA and LGA using INTERGROWTH-21st standards. Gestation-specific stillbirth rates, with total births as the denominator, and gestation-specific stillbirth risks, with fetuses still in utero as the denominator, were calculated from 24 to 44 weeks of gestation.Main outcome measures: Gestation-specific stillbirth rates and risks according to size at birth.Results: The overall stillbirth rate was 4.22 per 1000 total births (95% CI 4.22-4.23) across all gestations. Applying the birth-based approach, the stillbirth rates were highest at 24 weeks of gestation, with 621.6 per 1000 total births (95% CI 620.9-622.2) for SGA pregnancies, 298.4 per 1000 total births (95% CI 298.1-298.7) for AGA pregnancies and 338.5 per 1000 total births (95% CI 337.9-339.0) for LGA pregnancies. Applying the fetuses-at-risk approach, the gestation-specific stillbirth risk was highest for SGA pregnancies (1.3-1.4 per 1000 fetuses at risk) prior to 29 weeks of gestation. The risk remained stable between 30 and 34 weeks of gestation, and then increased gradually from 35 weeks of gestation to the highest rate of 8.4 per 1000 fetuses at risk (95% CI 8.3-8.4) at ≥42 weeks of gestation. The stillbirth risk ratio (RR) was consistently high for SGA compared with AGA pregnancies, with the highest RR observed at ≥42 weeks of gestation (RR 9.2, 95% CI 15.2-13.2), and with the lowest RR observed at 24 weeks of gestation (RR 3.1, 95% CI 1.9-4.3). The stillbirth RR was also consistently high for SGA compared with AGA pregnancies across all countries, with national variability ranging from RR 0.70 (95% CI 0.43-0.97) in Mexico to RR 8.6 (95% CI 8.1-9.1) in Uruguay. No increased risk for LGA pregnancies was observed.Conclusions: Small for gestational age (SGA) was strongly associated with stillbirth risk in this study based on high-quality data from high- and middle-income countries. The highest RRs were seen in preterm gestations, with two-thirds of the stillbirths born as preterm births. To advance our understanding of stillbirth, further analyses should be conducted using high-quality data sets from low-income settings, particularly those with relatively high rates of SGA.
Fil: Okwaraji, Yemisrach B.. London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine; Reino Unido
Fil: Suárez Idueta, Lorena. Mexican Society of Public Health; México
Fil: Ohuma, Eric O.. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Bradley, Ellen. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Yargawa, Judith. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Pingray, Veronica. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; Argentina
Fil: Cormick, Gabriela. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública; Argentina
Fil: Gordon, Adrienne. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Flenady, Vicki. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Horváth Puhó, Erzsébet. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Sørensen, Henrik Toft. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Abuladze, Liili. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Heidarzadeh, Mohammed. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Khalili, Narjes. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Yunis, Khalid A.. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Al Bizri, Ayah. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Barranco, Arturo. University Of London. School Of Advanced Study; Reino Unido
Fil: van Dijk, Aimée E.. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Broeders, Lisa. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Alyafei, Fawzya. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Olukade, Tawa O.. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Razaz, Neda. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Söderling, Jonas. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Smith, Lucy K.. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Matthews, Ruth J.. University Of London. School Of Advanced Study; Reino Unido
Fil: Wood, Rachael. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Monteath, Kirsten. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Pereyra, Isabel. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Pravia, Gabriella. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Lisonkova, Sarka. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Wen, Qi. University of London; Reino Unido
Fil: Lawn, Joy E.. University Of London. School Of Advanced Study; Reino Unido
Fil: Blencowe, Hannah. University of London; Reino Unido