At least four registries are collecting cases but, so far as we’re aware, none have yet published results. Update 14 April, the Netherlands registry is publishing data. Below are totals from scientific reports in English, avoiding duplicates as far as possible. Update 12 May the UKOSS registry is now published, dwarfs all other studies, and is likely the most representative. These running totals are now obsolete.  We will therefore stop adding to them from today, 12 May.  We will continue to correct errors. Click here for links to, and descriptions of, the original reports. Cases only reported in newspapers & social media are not included.

Update 12 May – UKOSS (Study 92) and studies 79 & 85 added.  Studies 86 to 91 (tba), US studies which may include duplicates, will be added when disambiguated.

Update 3 May – various studies added.  More detailed Lombardy report S64 replaces S32. Inclusion of S66, S67 & S70, non-duplicated maternal death reports, probably make the maternal death totals misleading. Discussed here.

Update 25 April – 33 duplicate mothers and babies removed from Study 8 due to overlap with Study 55. Three infected babies from Study 8 remain in the “infected” column because Study 55 did not report baby infection.

Update 23 April – Studies 48, 50, 51 & 53 (5 mothers & 5 babies) added. Study 55 (9 early pregnancy losses, 68 delivered mothers, 70 babies & 41 ongoing pregnancies from Wuhan hospitals) also added. But 71 previously included & presumed non-duplicate delivered mothers and 73 babies from Wuhan, reported in studies 1, 2, 5, 6, 6a, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 17, 30, & 37 removed. The woman whose baby died, reported in study 5, has been left in the count since neither she nor her baby appears in study 55.

Update 18 April. Studies 45 & 46 added, & study 42 (updated NethOSS) removed from running totals

Update 16 April. Study 13; all six cases removed from running totals. Study 3; 12/13 mothers & 9/10 babies removed. Both due to suspected duplication.

Update 14 April Studies 42 & 43 added. Study 42 is the Netherlands “Covid-19 in pregnancy” registry, the first to report. Study 43 is the first academic report of a maternal death from Covid-19

Update 13 April Study 39 added.

Update 11 April Study 34 and 37 added

Update 9 April 2020 Studies 31 and 32 added

Update 8 April Study 30 added.

Update 7 April 2020 Studies 27 & 28 included. Study 14 all duplicates. Reasons for excluding studies 23-26 and 29 here.

Update 2 April 2020 Studies 18 – 22 added.

Update 1 April 2020 Study 6A included. (See also note re corrections below)

Mothers

*ECMO, a assumed to be ongoing, not explicitly stated. b two 1st trimester terminations. c brief additional information from only 74 cases. d brief additional details from 91. e includes 9 early pregnancy losses. f this woman from study 5 presumed non duplicate since her baby died, and no babies reported to have died in study 55.  g see discussion on maternal deaths here.

Babies

*stillbirth, **All 3 CS all PCR +ve & pneumonia (these three baby details included although cases probably overlap with study 55 not included in mother or baby totals), +IgM but probably are included in study 1, $PCR 36hours, a one set of twins, bCS at 34w BW 2,200g, refractory shock & DIC day 8, died day 9, COVID-19 throat swab day 9 negative. c twins. d Baby status assumed, not explicitly stated. e one set of twins. f no baby details. g one set of twins, but excluding three terminations. h Stillborn after spontaneous labour while mother was ventilated. i incl. two sets of twins.  j this baby from study 5 presumed non duplicate since it died, & no babies reported to have died in study 55. k includes 4 early pregnancy losses

Jim Thornton, Keelin O’Donoghue, & Kate Walker.

Adjustment 7 April. Earlier versions of this table had reported the babies and mothers of some ongoing pregnancies in the “alive” column. This column has been relabelled “Alive & delivered” with appropriate adjustments made.

Correction 1 April. The first version of this table on 30 March missed the neonatal death, and failed to note a set of twins born vaginally, in study 9. Both corrected. I’ve also reconsidered excluding the 33 neonatal cases reported in JAMA (Study 8) from the maternal totals, having learned that Wuhan Children’s Hospital has it’s own birth unit separate from Union Hospital.  The mother & baby numbers should now align, after taking multiples into account.