An observation study of the emergency intervention in placenta accreta spectrum
- 32 Downloads
This study explored the probability and outcome of delivery in women with placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) according to gestational age at delivery.
A retrospective cohort study among women with PAS who had cesarean section was conducted. The gestational week (gw) of delivery and estimated blood loss (EBL) were recorded. The proportion of urgent delivery beyond 32 gw and EBL in women with or without antepartum suspected diagnosis of placenta accreta was compared.
Totally, 180 women with PAS were enrolled. Of these, 54 (30.0%, 95% CI 23.8–37.1%) were delivered by urgent cesarean delivery and 126 (70.0%, 95% CI 62.9–76.2%) by elective cesarean section. The probability of emergent delivery was increased from 3.1 to 5.7% at 33–36 weeks, and increased by > 10% beyond 37 weeks. Among 121 antenatal suspected PAS patients, 25 (20.7%, 95% CI 14.4–28.7%) had emergency cesarean section, and 96 (79.3%, 95% CI 71.3–85.6%) experienced elective cesarean. The EBL of PAS in both emergent group (r = − 0.276, p = 0.044) and elective group (r = − 0.370, p < 0.001) was significantly decreased with gestational age progression. The antepartum hemorrhage increased the risk of urgent delivery [OR 2.54 (1.19, 5.44)] (p = 0.016), while PAS with antepartum diagnosis decreased the risk [OR 0.21 (0.10, 0.43)] (p < 0.001).
Although the incidence of emergency operation in PAS patients was increased at 32–36 gw, there was no significant difference among the groups. The decision of timing for pregnancy termination should be made cautiously. We recommend scheduled operation at around 36–37 gw. In serious cases, the termination time could be arranged as early as appropriate.
KeywordsEmergency intervention Placenta accreta spectrum Observational study
Prof. YZ and Dr. YW design the study and wrote the manuscript. Dr. LZ and Dr. ZN collected the data, analysis the data, and wrote the manuscript. Dr. YC and Dr. AZ done the ultrasound and analyzed the data of this study. Prof. BM analyzed the data and wrote the manuscript.
This work was fund by the National Key R&D program of China, 2016YFC1000404.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declared that they have no conflicts of interest to this work.
- 3.Read JA, Cotton DB, Miller FC (1980) Placenta accreta: changing clinical aspects and outcome. Obstet Gynecol 56:31–34Google Scholar
- 7.Zhongying D (2008) Nomenclature, incidence and etiology of invasive placenta. J Pract Obstetr Gynecol 12:705–707Google Scholar
- 9.Briery CM, Rose CH, Hudson WT, Lutgendorf MA, Magann EF, Chauhan SP et al (2007) Planned vs emergent cesarean hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 197(154):e1–5Google Scholar
- 12.Placenta accreta. Committee Opinion No. 529 (2012) American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol 120:207–211.Google Scholar
- 20.Wright JD, Pri-Paz S, Herzog TJ, Shah M, Bonanno C, Lewin SN et al (2011) Predictors of massive blood loss in women with placenta accreta. Am J Obstet Gynecol 205(38):e1–6Google Scholar
- 25.Bowman ZS, Manuck TA, Eller AG, Simons M, Silver RM (2014) Risk factors for unscheduled delivery in patients with placenta accreta. Am J Obstet Gynecol 210(241):e1–6Google Scholar
- 26.Meller CH, Izbizky GH, Otaño L (2014) Timing of delivery in placenta accrete. Am J Obstet GynecolGoogle Scholar
- 27.Chong Y, Zhang A, Wang Y, Liu Z, Chen Y, Zhao Y (2016) Value of ultrasonic scoring system for predicting risks of placenta accreta. Zhonghua wei chan yi xue za zhi. 19(9):705–709Google Scholar