Ultrasonographic placental localisation and extent of invasion in scarred versus non-scarred uterus and its correlation with obstetrical outcomes: a prospective study

Anu Pathak; Ayushi Gupta; Saroj Singh; Neha Agarwal

doi:10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20232291

Authors

Anu Pathak Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, SN Medical College, Agra, Uttar Pradesh, India
Ayushi Gupta Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, SN Medical College, Agra, Uttar Pradesh, India
Saroj Singh Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, SN Medical College, Agra, Uttar Pradesh, India
Neha Agarwal Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, SN Medical College, Agra, Uttar Pradesh, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20232291

Keywords:

PAS, Placenta accreta, Previous CS

Abstract

Background: The site of implantation and resultant location of the placenta within the uterus are likely important determinants of placental blood flow and therefore pregnancy success. Abnormal placental implantation or ‘placental invasion’ is a rare, but potentially life‐threatening, complication in the third stage of labour. Currently massive obstetric haemorrhage remains one of the leading causes of maternal mortality.

Methods: 140 antenatal women at ≥34 weeks of gestation were selected, out of which 70 had the history of previous caesarean section and 70 had the history of previous vaginal delivery. Detailed USG was done with special emphasis on edge to os distance (EOD), extent and depth of invasion of placenta. All cases were followed till delivery and their intraoperative assessment done and correlated with sonographic findings and obstetrical outcomes.

Results: With increasing number of previous caesarean section, depth and extent of invasion of placenta increases and edge to os distance (EOD) decreases. 8.5% cases with previous 1 caesarean section, 22.22% cases with previous 2 caesarean section and 50% cases with previous >2 caesarean section had some adherence of placenta.

Conclusions: Uterine scar increases chances of low implantation of placenta as well as its adherence as compared with unscarred uterus. This risk increases with number of caesarean sections. These high-risk cases of scarred uterus especially those with multiple scars should be subjected to detailed sonographic scan by expert radiologist.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Kalanithi LE, Illuzzi JL, Nossov VB, Frisbaek Y, Abdel-Razeq S, Copel JA, et al. Intrauterine growth restriction and placental location. J Ultrasound Med. 2010;26:1481-9.

Newton ER, Barass V, Cetrulo CL. The epidemiology and clinical history of asymptomatic mid trimester placenta previa. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;148:743-8.

Magann EF, Doherty DA, Turner K, Lanneau GS, Jr, Morrison JC, Newnham JP. Second trimester placental location as a predictor of an adverse pregnancy outcome. J Perinatol. 2017;27:9-14.

Collins SL, Stevenson GN, Al-Khan A, Illsley NP, Impey L, Pappas L, et al. Three-dimensional power Doppler ultrasonography for diagnosing abnormally invasive placenta and quantifying the risk. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126(3):645.

Ayres-de-Campos D, Langhoff-Roos J, Fox KA, Collins S, FIGO Placenta Accreta Diagnosis and Management Expert Consensus Panel. FIGO classification for the diagnosis of placenta accreta spectrum disorders. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2016;146(1):20-4.

Nagpal K, Mittal P, Grover SB. Role of ultrasonographic placental thickness in prediction of fetal outcome: a prospective Indian study. J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2018;68(5):349-54.

Oppenheimer LW, Farine D. A new classification of placenta previa: measuring progress in obstetrics. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;201:227-9.

Cali G, Forlani F, Lees C, Timor-Tritsch I, Palacios- Jaraquemada J, Dall’Asta A, et al. Prenatal ultrasound staging system for placenta accreta spectrum disorders. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019;53(6):752-60.

Jauniaux E, Ayres-de-Campos D, Langhoff-Roos J, Fox KA, Collins S, FIGO Placenta Accreta Diagnosis and Management Expert Consensus Panel. FIGO classification for the clinical diagnosis of placenta accreta spectrum disorders. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2019;146(1):20-4.

Tovbin J, Melcer Y, Shor S, Pekar-Zlotin M, Mendlovic S, Svirsky R, et al. Prediction of morbidly adherent placenta using a scoring system. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016;48:504-10.

Upreti R, Rauniyar A, Rauniyar S, Ansari SN, Khadka M. A comparative study of obstetrics outcome of placenta previa in scarred versus unscarred uterus at tertiary Hospital. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2020;9(8):3183-7.

Oppenheimer LW, Farine D. A new classification of placenta previa: measuring progress in obstetrics. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;201:227-9.

Ornaghi S, Tessitore IV, Vergani P. Pregnancy and delivery outcomes in women with persistent versus resolved low-lying placenta in the late third trimester. J Ultrasound Med. 2021;9999:1-11.

Parikh PM, Makwana S, Shah S, Vithalani V. Feto-maternal outcome in placenta previa in scarred uterus vs non scarred uterus. IOSR J Dent Med Sci. 2016;15:69-73.

Kaur K, Kaur A, Garg R. Fetomaternal outcome in Placenta Previa in scarred uterus. Int J Curr Res. 2017;3:52-7.

Parvin Z, Das S, Naher L, Sarkar SK, Fatema K. Original article relation of placenta praevia with previous lower segment caesarean section (LUCS) in our clinical practice. Med Coll J. 2017;12:75-7.

Katke RD. Placenta previa: outcomes in scarred and unscarred uterus. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2017;5(8):2728-32.

Nair DB, Murukesan L, Menon S. The effect of previous obstetric interventions in the outcome of placenta previa. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2017;6(11):4879-85.

Wong TY. Emergency peripartum hysterectomy: a 10-year review in a tertiary obstetric hospital. N Z Med J. 2011;124(1345).