Random placenta margin incision for control hemorrhage during cesarean delivery complicated by complete placenta previa: a prospective cohort study

Prophylactic uterine artery embolization during cesarean delivery for management of hemorrhage in complete placenta previa: An observational study

Complete placenta previa is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in pregnant women and fetuses. This study aimed to evaluate whether prophylactic uterine artery embolization (PUAE) could reduce bleeding in patients with complete placenta previa. We retrospectively analyzed patients with complete placenta previa admitted to Taixing People's Hospital for elective cesarean delivery between January 2019 and December 2020. The women were treated with PUAE (PUAE group, n = 20) or without (control group, control, n = 20). Risk factors for bleeding (age, gestational age, pregnancy times, delivery times, cesarean delivery times), intraoperative blood loss, hemoglobin difference before and after surgery, transfusions volume, hysterectomy cases, major maternal complication cases, neonatal birth weight, neonatal Apgar score in 1 minute, postoperative hospitalization time were compared between 2 groups. There were no significant differences on risk factors for bleeding, neonatal birth weight, neonatal Apgar score in 1 minute, postoperative hospitalization time between 2 groups. However, the intraoperative blood loss, hemoglobin before and after operation, transfusion volume in the PUAE group was significantly lower than the control. There was no case of hysterectomy or major maternal complications in both groups. PUAE during cesarean may be an effective and safe strategy to reduce intraoperative blood loss and transfusion volume for patients with complete placenta previa.

Blood Type and Outcomes in Pregnant Women with Placenta Previa

Background

Placenta previa increases the risks of obstetrical complications. Many studies have reported a link between various ABO blood types and pregnancy complications. This study is aimed at describing and comparing the characteristics and outcomes of women with placenta previa by ABO blood type.

Methods

Data for this study was obtained from a retrospective cohort study between January 1, 2014, and June 30, 2019, of all clinically confirmed placenta previa in a university-based tertiary medical center. Both types of A, B, O, AB, and combining O and non-O blood types were compared to the characteristics and outcomes.

Results

1678 participants with placenta previa were included in this study. The highest participants were blood type O with 666 (39.7%), followed by type A with 508 (30.3%) and type B with 395 (23.5%), and the lowest participants were AB with 109 (6.5%). Blood type AB had a higher incidence of antepartum hemorrhage (p = 0.017), predelivery anemia (p = 0.036), and preterm birth (p = 0.015) in placenta previa women. Meanwhile, the incidence of rhesus D positive (97.9% vs. 95.8%, p = 0.012) and twins (5.0% vs. 2.7%, p = 0.011) was higher in the non-O group, and the incidence of neonatal asphyxia (5.9% vs. 9.2%, p = 0.016) was lower in the non-O group.

Conclusion

Type AB blood may be a potential risk factor for women with placenta previa. This finding may help provide any obstetrician to predict the risk of complication for placenta previa women by the ABO blood types.

Risk of preterm birth for placenta previa or low-lying placenta and possible preventive interventions: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the risk of preterm birth in women with a placenta previa or a low-lying placenta for different cut-offs of gestational age and to evaluate preventive interventions.

SEARCH AND METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, WHO-ICTRP and clinicaltrials.gov were searched until December 2021. Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies and case-control studies assessing preterm birth in women with placenta previa or low-lying placenta with a placental edge within 2 cm of the internal os in the second or third trimester were eligible for inclusion. Pooled proportions and odds ratios for the risk of preterm birth before 37, 34, 32 and 28 weeks of gestation were calculated. Additionally, the results of the evaluation of preventive interventions for preterm birth in these women are described.

RESULTS

In total, 34 studies were included, 24 reporting on preterm birth and 9 on preventive interventions. The pooled proportions were 46% (95% CI [39 - 53%]), 17% (95% CI [11 - 25%]), 10% (95% CI [7 - 13%]) and 2% (95% CI [1 - 3%]), regarding preterm birth <37, <34, <32 and <28 weeks in women with placenta previa. For low-lying placentas the risk of preterm birth was 30% (95% CI [19 - 43%]) and 1% (95% CI [0 - 6%]) before 37 and 34 weeks, respectively. Women with a placenta previa were more likely to have a preterm birth compared to women with a low-lying placenta or women without a placenta previa for all gestational ages. The studies about preventive interventions all showed potential prolongation of pregnancy with the use of intramuscular progesterone, intramuscular progesterone + cerclage or pessary.

CONCLUSIONS

Both women with a placenta previa and a low-lying placenta have an increased risk of preterm birth. This increased risk is consistent across all severities of preterm birth between 28-37 weeks of gestation. Women with placenta previa have a higher risk of preterm birth than women with a low-lying placenta have. Cervical cerclage, pessary and intramuscular progesterone all might have benefit for both women with placenta previa and low-lying placenta, but data in this population are lacking and inconsistent, so that solid conclusions about their effectiveness cannot be drawn.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42019123675.

Anesthetic management in cesarean delivery of women with placenta previa: a retrospective cohort study

Background

The incidence of placenta preiva is rising. Cesarean delivery is identified as the only safe and appropriate mode of delivery for pregnancies with placenta previa. Anesthesia is important during the cesarean delivery. The aim of this study is to assess maternal and neonatal outcomes of patients with placenta previa managed with neuraxial anesthesia as compared to those who underwent general anesthesia during cesarean delivery.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was performed of all patients with placenta preiva at our large academic institution from January 1, 2014 to June 30, 2019. Patients were managed neuraxial anesthesia and general anesthesia during cesarean delivery.

Results

We identified 1234 patients with placenta previa who underwent cesarean delivery at our institution. Neuraxial anesthesia was performed in 737 (59.7%), and general anesthesia was completed in 497 (40.3%) patients. The mean estimated blood loss at neuraxial anesthesia of 558.96 ± 42.77 ml were significantly lower than the estimated blood loss at general anesthesia of 1952.51 ± 180 ml (p < 0.001). One hundred and forty-six of 737 (19.8%) patients required blood transfusion at neuraxial anesthesia, whereas 381 out of 497 (76.7%) patients required blood transfusion at general anesthesia. The rate neonatal asphyxia and admission to NICU at neuraxial anesthesia was significantly lower than general anesthesia (2.7% vs. 19.5 and 18.2% vs. 44.1%, respectively). After adjusting confounding factors, blood loss was less, Apgar score at 1- and 5-min were higher, and the rate of blood transfusion, neonatal asphyxia, and admission to NICU were lower in the neuraxial group.

Conclusions

Our data demonstrated that neuraxial anesthesia is associated with better maternal and neonatal outcomes during cesarean delivery in women with placenta previa.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12871-021-01472-w.

Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes of Placenta Previa with and without Coverage of a Uterine Scar: A Retrospective Cohort Study in a Tertiary Hospital

Background

To compare the maternal and neonatal outcomes of placenta previa (PP) with and without coverage of a uterine scar in Foshan, China.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study comparing all singleton pregnancies with PP was conducted at a tertiary, university-affiliated medical center from 1 January 2012 to 31 April 2017 in Foshan, China. Demographic, clinical and laboratory data were extracted from electronic medical records (EMRs). Maternal and neonatal outcomes of PP with and without coverage of a uterine scar were compared by statistical method.

Results

There were 58,062 deliveries during the study period, of which 726 (1.25%) were complicated PP in singleton pregnancies and were further classified into two groups: the PP with coverage of a uterine scar group (PPCS, n=154) and the PP without coverage of a uterine scar group (Non-PPCS, n=572). Overall, premature birth (<37 weeks, 67.5% vs 54.8%; P=0.019), cesarean section (100% vs 97.6%; P=0.050), intraoperative blood loss >1000 mL (77.9% vs 16.0%; P<0.001) or >3000mL (29.9% vs 3.0%; P<0.001), bleeding within 2-24 hours after delivery (168.2±370.1 ml vs 49.9±58.4 ml; P<0.001), postpartum hemorrhage (48.7% vs 15.7%; P<0.001), transfusion (34.6% vs 16.1%; P<0.001), hemorrhage shock (7.8% vs 1.9%; P<0.001), hysterectomy (2.6% vs 0.5%; P=0.019), fetal distress (35.7% vs 12.1%; P<0.001) and APGAR score at 1 min (15.2% vs 7.1%; P=0.002) had a significant difference between PPCS group and Non-PPCS group. After grouping by whether complicated with placenta accreta spectrum disorders (PASD), we found that PPCS was significant associated with more intraoperative blood loss >1000mL, intraoperative blood loss >3000mL, bleeding within 2–24 hours after delivery and fetal distress than the Non-PPCS group.

Conclusion

The PPCS group had poorer maternal and neonatal outcomes than the Non-PPCS group after grouping by whether pregnancies complicated with PASD or with different placental positions.

Maternal and neonatal outcomes in transverse and vertical skin incision for placenta previa : Skin incision for placenta previa

BACKGROUND

Placenta previa, a serious obstetric issue, should be managed by experienced teams. The safe and appropriate mode of delivery for placenta previa is by cesarean delivery. However, no studies were found comparing either maternal or neonatal outcomes for different skin incision in women with placenta previa. The aim of this study was to compare maternal and neonatal outcomes by skin incision types (transverse compared with vertical) in a large cohort of women with placenta previa who were undergoing cesarean delivery.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study carried out between January 2014 and June 2019. All pregnant women with placenta previa had confirmed by ultrasonologist before delivery and obstetrician at delivery. The primary outcome was the estimated blood loss during the surgery and within the first 24 hours postoperatively. Mean (standard deviation), median (interquartile range) or frequency (percentage) was reported to variables. Appropriate parametric and nonparametric tests were used to analyses.

RESULTS

The study included 1098 complete records, 332 (30.24%) cases in the vertical skin incision group and 766 (69.76%) cases in the transverse skin incision group. Those with vertical incision showed a higher percentage of preterm delivery, anterior placenta, abnormally invasive placenta, and history of previous cesarean delivery, and a lower percentage of first pregnancy, in vitro fertilization, and emergency cesarean delivery. After controlling for confounding factors, higher incidence of post-partum hemorrhage (OR 5.47, 95% CI 3.84-7.79), maternal intensive care unit (OR 4.30, 95% CI 2.86-6.45), transfusion (OR 5.97, 95% CI 4.15-8.58), and 5-min APGAR< 7 (OR 9.03, 95% CI 1.83-44.49), a more estimated blood loss (β 601.85, 95%CI 458.78-744.91), and a longer length of hospital stay after delivery (β 0.54, 95%CI 0.23-0.86) were found in the vertical skin incision group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data demonstrated that transverse skin incision group showed the better perinatal outcomes in women with placenta previa. Future collaborative studies are needed to be done by centers for placenta previa to have a better understanding of the characteristics and the outcomes of the disease in the choosing skin incision.

Efficacy and safety of umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells in treatment of cesarean section skin scars: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Pathological skin scars, caused by cesarean section, affected younger mothers esthetically and psychosocially and to some extent frustrated obstetricians and dermatologists. Umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells (UC-MSCs), as a population of multipotent cells, are abundant in human tissues, providing several possibilities for their effects on skin scar tissues. Herein, we performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, three-arm clinical trial, aiming to assess the efficacy and safety of UC-MSCs in the treatment of cesarean section skin scars among primiparous singleton pregnant women.

METHODS

Ninety primiparous singleton pregnant women undergoing elective cesarean section were randomly allocated to receive placebo, low-dose (3 × 10⁶ cells), or high-dose (6 × 10⁶ cells) transdermal hydrogel UC-MSCs on the surface of the skin incision. The primary outcome was cesarean section skin scars followed after the sixth month, assessed by the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS).

RESULTS

All the participants completed their trial of the primary outcome according to the protocol. The mean score of estimated total VSS was 5.52 in all participants at the sixth-month follow-up, with 6.43 in the placebo group, 5.18 in the low-dose group, and 4.71 in the high-dose group, respectively. No significant difference was found between-group in the mean scores for VSS at the sixth month. Additional prespecified secondary outcomes were not found with significant differences among groups either. No obvious side effects or adverse effects were reported in any of the three arms.

CONCLUSION

This randomized clinical trial showed that UC-MSCs did not demonstrate the effects of improvement of cesarean section skin scars.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02772289. Registered on 13 May 2016.

Efficacy of intraoperative wireless ultrasonography for uterine incision among patients with adherence findings in placenta previa

AIM

We evaluated the effectiveness of intraoperative wireless ultrasonography in determining the location of uterine incision during cesarean delivery in patients with placenta previa who have sonographic adherence findings in order to assess intraoperative blood loss and maternal morbidity.

METHODS

A prospective study using wireless sonography, including 15 patients with previa, was conducted among women with singleton pregnancies who delivered by cesarean section between August 1, 2017, and August 30, 2019. Retrospective study for the control group included 32 patients with placenta previa who underwent cesarean section between January 1, 2016, and July 31, 2017, without wireless sonography. Patients with previa who had adherence findings in prenatal sonography were included in both groups. Logistic regression was used to identify the association between massive intraoperative bleeding loss and use of wireless ultrasound sonography.

RESULTS

Intraoperative blood loss was significantly reduced in the study group compared to that in the control group (P = 0.009). The hospital stay was significantly shorter in the study group compared to the control group (5 days vs 6 days, P < 0.001). The use of intraoperative wireless sonography (P = 0.01) had a significant association with massive intraoperative hemorrhage in multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSION

Our study is the first study to apply a wireless ultrasound sonography device in women with placenta previa during cesarean section to examine maternal morbidity. This latest wireless ultrasound sonography device is advantageous for uterine incision guidance in women with placenta previa and improves maternal morbidity by reducing intraoperative hemorrhage.