Sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS)—Standardised investigations and classification: Recommendations (original) (raw)
Related papers
Acta Paediatrica, 2007
Infants that died suddenly and unexpectedly were studied as part of the European Concerted Action on sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). Three paediatric pathologists, first independently of each other and later in a consensus meeting, classified 63 cases into 3 groups: SIDS (19 cases), borderline SIDS (30 cases) and non-SIDS (14 cases). The interobserver agreement among the pathologists before the consensus meeting was moderate (Kappa = 0.41) and jointly it was higher (Kappa = 0.83). The distribution of epidemiologically determined risk factors was studied over these three groups. Maternal smoking after birth, low socioeconomic status and thumb sucking were found more often in SIDS than in the other cases. Inexperienced prone sleeping was a determinant for SIDS, but not for non-SIDS. Previous hospital admission, low birthweight and/or short gestation were associated with borderline SIDS. Non-SIDS cases received more breastfeeding, the parents hardly smoked during pregnancy and after birth, a firm mattress had been used, and more often signs of illness had been reported by the parents, compared with the SIDS and borderline SIDS cases. Bedding factors and both primary and secondary prone sleeping were equally distributed over the three groups which supports the hypothesis that, in SIDS and borderline SIDS, as well as in non-SIDS cases, some similar external and preventable factors might influence the events leading to death. Research should therefore focus on all sudden unexpected deaths, after which subgroups such as SIDS cases can be separately analysed. The postmortem is an essential part of the whole work-up of each case and the results should be interpreted with all other available data to arrive at a sound evaluation of cases and thus form the basis for the prevention of all sudden unexpected infant death. ٖ Cot death, epidemiology, pathology, risk factors, sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), SUD
Research and sudden infant death syndrome: Definitions, diagnostic difficulties and discrepancies
Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health, 2004
The diagnosis of causes of sudden infant death is an often complex and difficult process. Variable standards of autopsy practice and the use of different definitions for entities such as sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) have also contributed to confusion and discrepancies. For example, the term SIDS has been used when the requirements of standard definitions have not been fulfilled. In an attempt to correct this situation recent initiatives have been undertaken to stratify cases of unexpected infant death and to institute protocols that provide frameworks for investigations. However, if research is to be meaningful, researchers must be scrupulous in assessing how extensively cases have been investigated and how closely cases fit with internationally recognized definitions and standards. Unless this approach is adopted, evaluation of research findings in SIDS will be difficult and the literature will continue to be beset by contradictions and unsubstantiated conclusions.
Sudden infant death syndrome — a ‘diagnosis’ in search of a disease
Journal of Clinical Forensic Medicine, 1995
week and 1 year in Western countries, it is one of the most enigmatic conditions encountered in paediatric forensic practice. SIDS has been recognized since Biblical times, and yet the definition continues to be debated and the aetiology remains obscure. In addition, there are no accepted pathognomonic features at post-mortem and the diagnosis is still one of exclusion. Emery once asked whether the term 'SIDS' is in reality more of a 'diagnostic dustbin' into which are placed a variety of unrelated entities. 1 To a certain extent this is true, as it is now recognized that a range of disorders can result in the sudden and unexpected death of an infant in a cot. It is also likely that the aetiology of SIDS is heterogeneous and that the term SIDS is not so much a diagnosis but a term covering a variety of mechanisms which result in a common lethal outcome. There are a number of controversies in the SIDS field which complicate the use of the term and which confound the assessment of causes and mechanisms of sudden infant death.
Sudden Infant Death Syndrome: Overview and Update
Pediatric and Developmental Pathology, 2003
The past decade and a half has seen marked changes in the epidemiology of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). The avoidance of certain risk factors such as sleeping prone and cigarette smoke exposure has resulted in the death rate falling dramatically. Careful evaluation of environmental factors and endogenous characteristics has led to a greater understanding of the complexities of the syndrome. The development and implementation of death scene and autopsy protocols has led to standardization in approaches to unexpected infant deaths with increasing diagnoses of accidental asphyxia. Despite these advances, there is still confusion surrounding the diagnosis, with deaths being attributed to SIDS in many communities and countries where death scene investigations and autopsies have not been conducted. The following review provides a brief overview of the historical background, epidemiology, pathology, and pathogenesis of SIDS. Contentious issues concerning the diagnosis and current problems are discussed. Despite calls to abandon the designation, SIDS remains a viable term for infants who die in their sleep with no evidence of accident, inflicted injury, or organic disease after a full investigation has been conducted according to standard guidelines.
Sudden Infant Death Syndrome: Beyond Risk Factors
Life, 2021
Sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) is defined as “the sudden death of an infant under 1 year of age which remains unexplained after thorough investigation including a complete autopsy, death scene investigation, and detailed clinical and pathological review”. A significant decrease of SIDS deaths occurred in the last decades in most countries after the beginning of national campaigns, mainly as a consequence of the implementation of risk reduction action mostly concentrating on the improvement of sleep conditions. Nevertheless, infant mortality from SIDS still remains unacceptably high. There is an urgent need to get insight into previously unexplored aspects of the brain system with a special focus on high-risk groups. SIDS pathogenesis is associated with a multifactorial condition that comprehends genetic, environmental and sociocultural factors. Effective prevention of SIDS requires multiple interventions from different fields. Developing brain susceptibility, intrinsic vulnerab...
Sudden Infant Death Syndrome: Risk Factor Profiles for Distinct Subgroups
American Journal of Epidemiology, 1998
The authors investigated risk profiles of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) as a function of age at death. A case-control study carried out in the Tyrol region of Austria enrolled 99 infants who died of SIDS between 1984 and 1994 and 136 randomly selected controls. Early and late SIDS (<120 days of age vs. ^120 days) were defined according to the clear-cut bimodal age-at-death distribution. Inadequate antenatal care, low parental social and educational level, and the prone sleeping position were risk conditions that applied to both early and late SIDS. A marked seasonal variation (winter preponderance) was the most outstanding feature of late SIDS. A gestational age of <37 weeks (odds ratio (OR) = 8.4, 95% confidence interval (Cl) 2.6-26.0), repeated episodes of apnea (OR = 5.7, 95% Cl 1.2-27.0), low birth weight (<2,500 g) (OR = 3.4, 95% Cl 1.1-11.0), a family history of sudden infant death (OR = 2.9, 95% Cl 1.1-7.5), and maternal smoking during pregnancy (OR = 2.2, 95% Cl 1.0-^.5) were associated with early SIDS. This study identified two distinct subgroups of SIDS infants characterized by different risk conditions and ages at death. These results underline a multiple-cause hypothesis for SIDS etiology which involves a genetic predisposition, immaturity in the first months of life, and environmental factors acting at various ages.
Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) Research: Dogma disguised as science
Academia Letters, 2022
The epidemiological features of SIDS reflect an infection-related aetiology. The main pathological findings (heavy fluid-laden lungs, intrathoracic petechial hemorrhages, heavy brain, thymus and liver) are observed in the majority of cases. The reason for this paper is to emphasize an extraordinary aspect of mainstream research: that it tends to ignore (or misinterpret) the epidemiology and the anatomical pathology of SIDS and through these omissions or misinterpretations has entered into the domain of dogma by following lines of research that follow unproven ideas such as the Triple Risk Hypothesis. Such research does not consider the abovementioned key features of SIDS which still stand as the best guide to the underlying cause or causes of this tragic enigma. This article explores the possible