I am working on transferring blogs/pages from my old web site to this site. For SNF, I added images to the original blog. I wish I had been able to return to the slides and take new images, but I think those I have are sufficient for the main points of the section.
I had hoped to better evaluate SNF in the PROOF study, but we did not have enough cases to generate meaningful results. A collaborative study would be needed.
SNF is important to the pathologist as a clue that there may be a blood borne infection (STORCH), but there are usually other simpler ways to make such a diagnosis.
The unanswered question is why is there an association with stillbirth. Could this have been due to a selection bias, or the inclusion of more STORCH cases in the studies? Or is there a set of microorganisms that are more likely to invade the cord and cause lethal infection in the infant? In the cases I have done, no known bacterial pathogens have not been cultured from the fetus. Does SNF cause umbilical vascular injury and interfere with normal cord perfusion?
There are still some questions to answer.
obstetrical pathology 
Leave a Reply