Placental Weight, Shape and Gross Vascular Morphology

  • Carolyn SalafiaEmail author
  • Drucilla J. Roberts


The placenta is the only human organ that has a highly variable, stochastic shape. Deviation of a placenta from the average (more or less round, with a more or less centrally inserted cord and uniform disk thickness) reflects effects of the maternal environment on and the fetoplacental unit’s response to those stressors. That the majority of placental shapes are not round, not of uniform thickness and not with a central umbilical cord insertion speaks to the ubiquity of these stresses in even the most clinically uncomplicated pregnancies. It is for that reason that the placenta, as a marker or mediator of intrauterine effects, is so critical to the understanding of the fetal origins of adult health and disease, since the majority of us likely had some placental stress and potential programming that may account for aspects of our lifelong health.

Placental mass can be summed as “weight”, but chorionic surface shape, umbilical cord insertion relative to the shape of the chorionic plate and to the area of the chorionic plate covered by chorionic surface vessels, disk thickness and the structure of the chorionic surface vessel network have each significant and independent predictive value for birth weight and also vary with specific maternal and/or fetal disorders. Preliminary evidence also suggests that each of these placental gross features has a different, if slightly overlapping, critical period of development. We consider each of these below; for a summary of our approach, see


  1. 1.
    Jansson T, Powell TL. IFPA 2005 Award in Placentology Lecture. Human placental transport in altered fetal growth: does the placenta function as a nutrient sensor?–A review. Placenta. 2006;27(Suppl A):S91–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Salafia CM, Zhang J, Miller RK, Charles AK, Shrout P, Sun W. Placental growth patterns affect birth weight for given placental weight. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol. 2007;79:281–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shah RG, Salafia CM, Girardi T, Merz GS. Villus packing density and lacunarity: Markers of placental efficiency? Placenta. 2016;48:68–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Salafia CM. Measuring the Placenta: Highlights into the "how" and "when" of gestational complications. Accessed 2 May 2018.
  5. 5.
    Salafia CM, Dygulska B, Perez-Avilan G, et al. The relationship between birth and placental weights changes with placental size. Early Hum Dev. 2017;111:56–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    McNamara H, Hutcheon JA, Platt RW, Benjamin A, Kramer MS. Risk factors for high and low placental weight. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2014;28:97–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Salafia CM. Measuring the Placenta: Highlights into the “how” and “when” of gestational complications. Accessed 2 May 2018.
  8. 8.
    Salafia CM, Charles AK, Maas EM. Placenta and fetal growth restriction. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2006;49:236–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
  10. 10.
    Salafia CM, Yampolsky M, Shlakhter A, Mandel DH, Schwartz N. Variety in placental shape: when does it originate? Placenta. 2012;33:164–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Raio L, Ghezzi F, Cromi A, Nelle M, Dürig P, Schneider H. The thick heterogeneous (jellylike) placenta: a strong predictor of adverse pregnancy outcome. Prenat Diagn. 2004;24:182–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schwartz N, Mandel D, Shlakhter O, et al. Placental morphologic features and chorionic surface vasculature at term are highly correlated with 3-dimensional sonographic measurements at 11 to 14 weeks. J Ultrasound Med. 2011;30:1171–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yampolsky M, Salafia CM, Shlakhter O, Haas D, Eucker B, Thorp J. Centrality of the umbilical cord insertion in a human placenta influences the placental efficiency. Placenta. 2009;30:1058–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Suzuki S. Clinical significance of pregnancies with circumvallate placenta. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2008;34:51–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yampolsky M, Salafia CM, Misra DP, Shlakhter O, Gill JS. Is the placental disk really an ellipse? Placenta. 2013;34:391–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Salafia CM. The amazing blood vessels that may have made us what we are. Accessed 2 May 2018.
  17. 17.
    Gordon Z, Elad D, Almog R, Hazan Y, Jaffa AJ, Eytan O. Anthropometry of fetal vasculature in the chorionic plate. J Anat. 2007;211:698–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shah RG, Salafia CM, Girardi T, Conrad L, Keaty K, Bartelot A. Shape matching algorithm to validate the tracing protocol of placental chorionic surface vessel networks. Placenta. 2015;36:944–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Salafia CM, Misra DP, Yampolsky M, Girardi T. Placental vascular tree as biomarker of Autism/ASD risk. Accessed 2 May 2018.
  20. 20.
    Nakamura M, Umehara N, Ishii K, et al. A poor long-term neurological prognosis is associated with abnormal cord insertion in severe growth-restricted fetuses. J Perinat Med. 2017; pii: /j/jpme.ahead-of-print/jpm-2017-0240/jpm-2017-0240.xml. PMID: 29267174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nasiell J, Papadogiannakis N, Löf E, Elofsson F, Hallberg B. Hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy in newborns linked to placental and umbilical cord abnormalities. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016;29:721–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Placental Modulation LaboratoryInstitute for Basic Research in Developmental DisabilitiesStaten IslandUSA
  2. 2.Bronx Lebanon Medical Center, and New York Presbyterian Brooklyn Methodist HospitalThe BronxUSA
  3. 3.Queens Hospital CenterNYUSA
  4. 4.Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General HospitalHarvard Medical SchoolBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations