Opportunities for, and barriers to, uterus-preserving surgical techniques for placenta accreta spectrum

Insights into Congenital Body Stalk Anomaly Coupled with Placenta Accreta Conditions: A Case Report

BACKGROUND Body stalk anomaly is a rare abdominal wall defect thought to be a consequence of abnormalities in the development of cephalic, caudal, and lateral embryonic folding and defect in closure of the body wall during embryogenesis. Placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) is a general term frequently used to encompass accreta, increta, and percreta conditions. This report describes a distinct pregnancy with a body stalk abnormality and PAS. CASE REPORT A 34-year-old woman, gravida 2 para 1, with no previous abortions, was referred to the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Unit for further investigation of omphalocele at 29 weeks of gestation. Although the defect was not suspected during the first trimester scan, subsequent obstetric ultrasounds revealed a severe abdominal wall defect, kyphoscoliosis, a very rudimentary umbilical cord, and limb defects. Ultrasound examination of the placenta showed increased vascularity at the placental bed and loss of the retroplacental-myometrial radiolucent interface, leading to diagnosis of suspected body stalk anomaly, with PAS. Cesarean delivery was performed at 30 weeks, with plan for conservative treatment for PAS, including uterine-sparing surgery. Baby was born weighing 800 g and measuring 25 cm in length, with an APGAR score of 1-1. Clinical examination confirmed a very short umbilical cord and severe abdominal wall and limb defects. However, due to significant hemorrhage during surgical procedure, cesarean hysterectomy was done. CONCLUSIONS The management of body stalk anomaly with PAS is challenging. Preconception counseling is important to detect abnormalities earlier, and a multidisciplinary care team is needed to create patients' treatment plans. This congenital defect is invariably fatal.

Local Resection After Cesarean Delivery for Placenta Accreta Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare maternal and surgical outcomes between local resection and immediate hysterectomy after cesarean delivery in patients with placenta accreta spectrum.

DATA SOURCES

Four public databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) were systematically searched for relevant publications up to July 31, 2024. Because the Cochrane Library included all the identified clinical trials, it was unnecessary to search ClinicalTrials.gov. The search strategy included the terms "placenta accreta" or "placenta accreta spectrum" and "pregnancy outcomes" and related key words about local resection and cesarean hysterectomy.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

With the use of established inclusion criteria, 4,889 studies were reviewed. The included studies evaluated surgical and maternal outcomes associated with immediate hysterectomy compared with local resection.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

Data extraction was conducted with the Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Study design framework. Both fixed-effects and random-effects models were used to synthesize the findings. A total of 11 studies published between 2018 and 2024 were analyzed (nine retrospective studies, one randomized controlled trial, and one prospective cohort study). The quality of the included studies was globally low, and 7 of 11 studies had severe bias. The immediate hysterectomy group had a significantly higher prevalence of placenta percreta compared with the local resection group (69.4% vs 44.3%, P<.01). In contrast to immediate hysterectomy, local resection yielded improved surgical outcomes, demonstrated by the following metrics: transfusion rate (six studies, 375 vs 205 patients, odds ratio [OR] 0.47, 95% CI, 0.29-0.75), estimated blood loss (seven studies, 416 vs 246 patients, mean difference -396 mL, 95% CI, -534 to -257), urologic complications (seven studies, 408 vs 241 patients, OR 0.18, 95% CI, 0.10-0.33), and intensive care unit admission (three studies, 87 vs 79 patients, OR 0.19, 95% CI, 0.07-0.53). One study recorded three maternal deaths: two in the immediate hysterectomy group and one in the local resection group. The results of subgroup analyses focused on patients with severe forms of placenta accreta spectrum (placenta increta and percreta) were similar in the overall analysis.

CONCLUSION

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, eligible studies comparing the local resection with immediate hysterectomy at cesarean hysterectomy for placenta accreta spectrum were overall low quality because of the lack of intention-to-treat information. Despite these limitations, local resection for placenta accreta spectrum may possibly be an option for appropriately selected patients to reduce surgical morbidity. Because the indication criteria, safety, surgical techniques, and necessity of adjunctive therapies for local resection remain understudied, further prospective studies are warranted.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO, CRD42024594315.

Maternal outcomes of conservative management and cesarean hysterectomy for placenta accreta spectrum disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Cesarean hysterectomy as a traditional therapeutic maneuver for placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) has been associated with serious morbidity, conservative management has been used in many institutions to treat women with PAS. This systematic review aims to compare maternal outcomes according to conservative management or cesarean hysterectomy in women with placenta accreta spectrum disorders.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and four Chinese databases (Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Wanfang database and VIP database) to May 2024. Included studies were to be retrospective or prospective in design and compare and report relevant maternal outcomes according to conservative management (the placenta left partially or totally in situ) or cesarean hysterectomy in women with PAS. A risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) was calculated for categorical outcomes and weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes. The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale was used to assess the observational studies. All analyses were performed using STATA version 18.0.

RESULTS

Eight studies were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with cesarean hysterectomy, PAS women undergoing conservative management showed lower estimated blood loss [WMD - 1623.83; 95% CI: -2337.87, -909.79], required fewer units of packed red blood cells [WMD - 2.37; 95% CI: -3.70, -1.04] and units of fresh frozen plasma transfused [WMD - 0.40; 95% CI: -0.62, -0.19], needed a shorter mean operating time [WMD - 73.69; 95% CI: -90.52, -56.86], and presented decreased risks of bladder injury [RR 0.24; 95% CI: 0.11, 0.50], ICU admission [RR 0.24; 95% CI: 0.11, 0.52] and coagulopathy [RR 0.20; 95% CI: 0.06, 0.74], but increased risk for endometritis [RR 10.91; 95% CI: 1.36, 87.59] and readmission [RR 8.99; 95% CI: 4.00, 12.21]. The incidence of primary or delayed hysterectomy rate was 25% (95% CI: 19-32, I2 = 40.88%) and the use of uterine arterial embolization rate was 78% (95% CI: 65-87, I2 = 48.79%) in conservative management.

CONCLUSION

Conservative management could be an effective alternative to cesarean hysterectomy when women with PAS desire to preserve the uterus and are informed about the limitations of conservative management.

PROSPERO ID

CRD42023484578.

Differentiating placenta accreta spectrum from scar dehiscence with underlying, non-adherent placenta: A systematic review of scoring systems and primary data analysis

INTRODUCTION

Accurate discrimination between placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) and scar dehiscence with underlying non-adherent placenta is challenging both on prenatal ultrasound and intraoperatively. This can lead to overdiagnosis of PAS and unnecessarily aggressive management of scar dehiscence which increases the risk of morbidity. Several scoring systems have been published which combine clinical and ultrasound information to help diagnose PAS in women at high risk. This research aims to provide insights into the reliability and utility of existing accreta scoring systems in differentiating these two closely related but different conditions to contribute to improved clinical decision making and patient outcomes.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A literature search was performed in four electronic databases. The references of relevant articles were also assessed. The articles were then evaluated according to the predefined inclusion criteria. Primary data for testing each scoring system were obtained retrospectively from two hospitals with specialized PAS services. Each scoring system was used to evaluate the predicted outcome of each case.

RESULTS

The literature review yielded 15 articles. Of these, eight did not have a clearly described diagnostic criteria for accreta, hence were excluded. Of the remaining seven studies, one was excluded due to unorthodox diagnostic criteria and two were excluded as they differed from the other systems hindering comparison. Four scoring systems were therefore tested with the primary data. All the scoring systems demonstrated higher scores for high-grade PAS compared to scar dehiscence (p < 0.001) with an excellent Area Under the receiver operator characteristic Curve ranging from 0.82 (95% CI 0.71-0.92) to 0.87 (95% CI 0.79-0.96) in differentiating between these two conditions. However, no statistically significant differences were noted between the low-grade PAS and scar dehiscence on all scoring systems.

CONCLUSIONS

Most published scoring systems have no clearly defined diagnostic criteria. Scoring systems can differentiate between scar dehiscence with underlying non-adherent placenta from high-grade PAS with excellent diagnostic accuracy, but not for low-grade PAS. Hence, relying solely on these scoring systems may lead to errors in estimating the risk or extent of the condition which hinders preoperative planning.