Usefulness of gray-scale ultrasound and complementary color Doppler ultrasound in the prenatal diagnosis of placenta previa accreta

Conservative Management of Abnormally Invasive Placentation

Due to the growing number of cesarean deliveries, the frequency of abnormally invasive placentation is increasing. The optimal management of this condition remains unclear. This article reviews the efficacy and safety of conservative management of abnormally invasive placentation. We performed a MEDLINE and Embase search and reviewed all articles on conservative management of abnormally invasive placentation published from 1985 through 2006. Over the past 20 years, 48 reports have described outcomes of 60 women who were treated conservatively for abnormally invasive placentation. Twenty-six women were managed without any additional interventions. In most of these patients (19/26), the placenta had been partially removed. In 4 of these 26, conservative therapy failed. Twenty-two women received adjuvant methotrexate. In most of these women (19/22), the entire placenta was left in situ. In 5, therapy failed. Twelve women were managed with arterial embolization. In most of these (9/12), the diagnosis was made antepartum and the placenta was completely left in situ. In 3, therapy failed. Overall, 11 women experienced infection (11/60), 21 women experienced vaginal bleeding (21/60), and 4 suffered disseminated intravascular coagulopathy (4/60). Spontaneous loss of placental tissue was noted in 16 women. Subsequent pregnancies were reported in 8 women. Conservative management of abnormally invasive placentation can be effective and fertility can be preserved. It should only be considered in highly selected cases when blood loss is minimal and there is desire for fertility preservation. Whether adjuvant methotrexate or selective arterial embolization is beneficial is uncertain. Undetectable hCG values do not seem to guarantee complete resorption of retained placental tissue.

Experience with Conservative Strategy of Uterine Artery Embolization in the Treatment of Placenta Percreta in the first Trimester of Pregnancy

OBJECTIVE

There is little prospective experience in the conservative treatment of placenta percreta during the first trimester in order to preserve uterine fertility. We describe herein our experience with uterine artery embolization (UAE) in the management of placenta percreta at 9 weeks of gestation.

CASE REPORT

A 36-year-old woman, gravida 3, para 1, was referred for ultrasonographic evaluation because of suspected molar pregnancy due to persistent vaginal spotting at 9 weeks of gestation. A Grade 3+ lacunar flow pattern with multiple bizarre and large irregular sonolucent spaces were observed. Color Doppler imaging revealed extensive turbulent lacunar blood flow perfusing throughout the whole surrounding uteroplacental tissues and fetus. The patient was informed of the situation and she had a strong desire to avoid surgery. Conservative management with bilateral UAE was performed using polyvinyl alcohol particles to promote involution and shedding of the abnormally adherent placenta. However, an unsatisfactory vessel-occluding effect caused by extensive collateral supply was still detected after repeated UAE. We, therefore, performed hysterectomy, and the patient had an uneventful postoperative course.

CONCLUSION

The efficacy and complications of UAE as a therapeutic modality for the conservative management of invasive placentation in the first trimester of pregnancy are not clear, as this is the first report of its kind. However, although UAE had failed in this case, it may still be a useful procedure as a prophylactic measure before surgical intervention, and hysterectomy can also be performed for better control of operative hemorrhage.

Litigation in Obstetrics: a Lesson Learnt and a Lesson to Share

A perfect baby is the expectation of all parents, and a perfect outcome is the mission of obstetrics. Every obstetrician dreads to hear that there is an unexpected maternal mortality and/or severe fetal injury at the hospital. The role of a perceived public expectation of perfection in obstetric medicine reflects a belief that bad outcomes in obstetrics should not be tolerated and that every maternal-fetal injury merits financial compensation and punishment. What has brought these troubling times to obstetric medicine? The drivers behind malpractice crises are the four leading interest groups in the medical-legal debate: pregnant patients and their environment (husband, parents, relatives, friends, legislators, and the media), health-care providers, insurance companies, and trial attorneys. Litigation in obstetrics is the result of a complex of events when malpractice (presumed or real) impacts on the attitude of pregnant women and their environment. In such complexity, information is mandatory but may often be misinterpreted. If messages are not tailored to the receiver's capacity, communicating well with the pregnant patient becomes crucial. Therefore, to reduce medical-legal issues in obstetrics, increasing attention and an applicable standard of obstetric care to avoid negligence and medical errors should go along with better communication with pregnant women. Communication should be clear, targeted, effective, flexible, and empathic to share a common language and decisions. This review briefly presents and discusses some of the most frequently encountered medical-legal claim cases in obstetric practice. In-depth review of pregnancy-related deaths and major morbidities can help determine strategies needed to continue making pregnancy safer.