Ultrasound examination in the antenatal diagnosis of placenta accreta spectrum

Cover Page


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

The rise in cesarean section rates worldwide has greatly increased the rates of placenta accreta spectrum. Accurate diagnostics of placenta accreta spectrum before delivery is still difficult, as one-half to two-thirds of placenta accreta spectrum cases remain undiagnosed until delivery. Local and foreign studies reported the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography (US) as the most commonly used method for placenta accreta spectrum imaging because of its inexpensiveness, noninvasiveness, and swiftness. This review highlighted the possibilities of prenatal US diagnosis of placenta accreta spectrum. Diagnostic accuracy may be reduced by the localization of the placenta in the posterior wall and a higher body mass index. US and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are highly specific and useful in diagnosing or ruling out placenta accreta spectrum. Unlike MRI, the accuracy of US depends on the qualification; therefore, single-center studies often overestimate the accuracy of US. More studies of the diagnostic methods for placenta accreta spectrum are needed for the selection of logical obstetric techniques for managing pregnant women with this pathology.

Full Text

INTRODUCTION

Placenta accreta spectrum is abnormal trophoblast invasion of part or all of the placenta into the myometrium of the uterine wall [1]. By the invasion depth, placenta accreta (when the placenta reaches and grows into the basement membrane), placenta increta (trophoblast invasion of the myometrium), and placenta percreta (invasion of the serous membrane with possible damage to surrounding structures) are classified [2]. Placenta accreta spectrum is no longer a rare condition in current practice.

A meta-analysis by Jauniaux et al. found that in 2019, the prevalence of placenta accreta spectrum ranged 0.01% to 1.1%, with an overall pooled prevalence of 0.17%. The overall incidence of adhesive and invasive degrees of placenta accreta spectrum was 0.5 and 0.3 cases per 1000 births, respectively [3]. It should be noted that more than 90% of cases of placenta accreta spectrum occur in women with a history of previous cesarean section and a low-lying placenta or placenta previa [4]. A national case-control study using the UK Obstetric Surveillance System found that the incidence of placenta accreta spectrum increased from 1.7 per 10,000 births to 577 per 10,000 births in women with a history of cesarean section and placenta previa [5], i.e. the risk of placenta accreta spectrum increases dramatically with the number of previous cesarean sections. A large multicenter cohort study in the United States found that in women with placenta previa and a history of cesarean section, the risk of placenta accreta spectrum was 3%, 11%, 40%, 61%, and 67% for the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and subsequent cesarean sections, respectively [6].

Placenta accreta spectrum is a condition that can cause massive bleeding in a pregnant woman, resulting in forced hysterectomy or death. A meta-analysis by Jauniaux et al. (2019) reported prior surgical interventions, including cesarean section, uterine curettage, and myomectomy, in 314/441 women with placenta previa complicated by placenta accreta. Five maternal deaths were reported in 387 (1.3%) patients with placenta previa complicated by placenta accreta spectrum. The overall incidence of peripartum hysterectomy was ٥٢.٢٪ and ٤٦.٩٪ for cases of bleeding requiring blood transfusion. The pooled estimate for maternal mortality was ٠.٠٥٪ [٧–٨].

Placenta accreta is a serious obstetric complication. The increased incidence of cesarean sections worldwide in recent decades has led to a significant increase in the prevalence of placenta accreta [9]. If growth trends continue, the incidence will increase annually, as will the number of hysterectomies, hemorrhages, and deaths. However, accurate identification of placenta accreta before delivery remains a challenge, with half to two-thirds of placenta accreta cases remaining undiagnosed before delivery, as confirmed by recent studies [10]. Difficulties in diagnosis complicate the choice of the right obstetrical strategy, so the paper highlights the possibilities of prenatal diagnostics of this disorder.

ULTRASOUND DIAGNOSIS OF PLACENTA ACCRETA SPECTRUM

A meta-analysis by Zhong et al. (2021) showed that patients with timely diagnosis of placenta accreta spectrum had a higher gestational age at delivery, a lower amount of blood transfusion, a shorter length of hospital stay (in days), a lower risk of maternal intensive care unit admission and severe maternal morbidity compared with mothers who underwent emergency delivery with undiagnosed condition. Neonatal outcomes were also better in mothers with elective deliveries, as their newborns weighed more and were less likely to be admitted to the intensive care unit. The effect on neonatal weight appears to be mediated by increasing gestational age. The optimal management of placenta accreta spectrum depends on the ability to diagnose invasive placenta preoperatively, the depth of villous invasion, clinical symptoms, and the clinician’s experience. It should also be mentioned that the clinical diagnosis of placenta accreta spectrum should be made as early as possible and the pregnant woman should be thoroughly examined at the slightest suspicion [11].

Prenatal diagnosis of placenta accreta spectrum is usually performed by ultrasound (US) in the second and third trimesters of pregnancy and has been shown to have generally good diagnostic accuracy in women at risk, such as those with placenta previa and a history of cesarean section, especially when a combination of maternal risk factors and imaging sings are considered in a personalized diagnostic algorithm [12–15].

In 2016, Collins et al. published an article standardizing the ultrasound signs of placenta accreta spectrum [16–17]. Table 1 shows the ultrasound characteristics of placenta accreta spectrum, included in the meta-analyses.

 

Table 1. Standardized ultrasound signs of placenta accrete

Ultrasound sign

Standard definition

References

2D Grey scale imaging

Loss of clear area

Loss or heterogenity of the retroplacental clear area

[14, 16, 17, 19, 20, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31]

Abnormal placental lacunae

The presence of multiple lacunae, including large and irregular (Finberg grade 3), often with turbulent flow (the Swiss cheese sign)

[14, 16, 17, 19, 20, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31]

Abnormal structure of the interface between the uterus and the bladder wall.

Loss or rupture of the clear bladder wall (hyperechoic band or “line” between the uterine serosa and the bladder lumen)

[14, 16, 17, 19, 20, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32]

Thinned myometrium

Thinning of the myometrium over the placenta to <1 mm or undetectable

[16, 17, 19, 20, 29, 30, 31, 32]

Protrusion of placental fragments (“placental hernia”)

Deviation of the uterine serosa from the expected plane caused by protrusion of placental tissue into an adjacent organ, usually the bladder; the uterine serosa appears intact but the outline is distorted

[16, 17, 20, 28, 30, 32]

Focal exophytic mass

Placental tissue is seen to break through the uterine serosa and extend beyond its boundaries; most commonly observed within a full bladder

[14, 16, 17, 19, 29, 30]

2D color flow mapping

Hypervascularity of the vesicouterine area

Excessive color Doppler signal is seen between the myometrium and the posterior bladder wall, likely indicating multiple closely spaced tortuous vessels in this area (demonstrating multidirectional flow and aliasing artifact)

[14, 16, 17, 19, 20, 27, 28, 30, 32]

Subplacental hypervascularity

Excessive color Doppler signal is seen in the placental bed, likely indicating multiple closely spaced tortuous vessels in this area (demonstrating multidirectional flow and aliasing artifact)

[16, 17, 19, 20, 28, 30]

Vascular bridges

Vessels extend from the placenta through the myometrium and across the serosa into the bladder or other organs; often run perpendicular to the myometrium

[16, 17, 28, 30, 32]

Placental lacunae and their feeding vessels

High blood flow vessels leading from the myometrium into the placental lacunae, causing turbulence at the entrance

[16, 17, 20]

Diffuse or focal placental lacunar flow (the presence of a color Doppler signal within the placental lacunae)

Diffuse lacunar flow was defined as diffusely dilated vascular channels scattered throughout the placenta and surrounding myometrial or cervical tissue. Focal lacunar flow was defined as a color Doppler pattern showing irregular anechoic vascular lakes with turbulent lacunar flow distributed within the placental area

[19, 20, 30, 32]

3D ultrasound ± power Doppler

Intraplacental hypervascularity

Complex, irregular arrangement of numerous placental vessels with tortuous passages and varying diameters

[16, 17]

Placental hernia

Similar to 2D grayscale imaging

[16, 17]

Focal exophytic mass

Similar to 2D grayscale imaging

[16, 17]

Vesicouterine hypervascularity

Similar to 2D grayscale imaging

[16, 17]

Connective vessels

Similar to 2D grayscale imaging

[16, 17]

Note. ЦДК, color Doppler mapping; ЦДС, color Doppler signal.

 

Pagani et al. (2018) conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the overall diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound in determining the severity of placenta accreta spectrum. The topography of placental invasion was assessed using the anatomical classification of abnormal placental invasion proposed by Palacios-Jaraquemada et al. (2013). From the anatomical point of view, S1 invasion is a lesion of the uterine body, while S2 invasion is the location of abnormal attachment of the placenta mainly in the lower segment of the uterus or even lower. The topography of the invasion identified during surgery is accepted as the reference [18]. Ultrasound had generally good diagnostic accuracy in determining the depth of placental invasion. Only two studies evaluated the role of ultrasound in determining the topography of invasion. Placenta accreta spectrum was confirmed at surgery in 93.4% of women with S1 invasion and 90.3% of women with S2 invasion. Thinning of the myometrium, rupture of the uterine wall, and hypervascularity of the uterus were associated with the most severe types of placenta accreta spectrum and showed good prognostic accuracy. Furthermore, most studies evaluating the prognostic accuracy of ultrasound in detecting placenta accreta spectrum did not report the diagnostic value of ultrasound in determining the topography of placenta accreta spectrum according to the classification system of Palacios-Jaraquemada et al. (2018) [19].

D’Antonio et al. (2013) considered ultrasound as the main method for prenatal diagnosis of the placenta accreta spectrum. Prenatal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may complement ultrasound, as it may be helpful in cases where ultrasound is inconclusive in assessing the extent of invasion (e.g., mixed ultrasound findings, posterior placenta). This review shows that prenatal ultrasound has prognostic value in the diagnosis of placenta accreta spectrum in a high-risk population. However, the authors believe that isolated ultrasound signs should be treated with caution. The discovery of one sign is likely to increase the potential for the discovery of others, since signs do not exist in isolation. This review found high sensitivity and specificity of the proposed method for multiple vascular lacunae. However, lacunae may also be present in women with placenta previa without placenta accreta spectrum. The invasion of trophoblastic tissue through the myometrium and the absence of the basal decidua in placenta accreta spectrum lead to a gradual decrease in myometrial thickness and loss of the hypoechoic area between the myometrium and the placenta. At the end of the third trimester, the lower uterine segment appears as a thin line on transabdominal ultrasound, and the interface between myometrium and placenta may be difficult to assess, which may explain the low sensitivity of this ultrasound sign. A higher grade of the placenta accreta spectrum is associated with destruction of the outer third of the myometrium and serous membrane of the uterus, followed by involvement of the bladder. This condition can be diagnosed using ultrasound by examining the interface between the myometrium and bladder, which is normally echogenic and smooth. This condition is a reliable sign for making the diagnosis, but its absence does not rule out lower grades of the placenta accreta spectrum.

However, these findings do not apply to placenta accreta located on the posterior wall or fundus of the uterus. Results apply only to women with placenta previa and a history of cesarean section or uterine surgery. The authors suggest that patients with an anterior placenta and a previous cesarean section represent the largest group of women with placenta accreta spectrum, who are most likely to have complications and for whom prenatal diagnosis is likely to be of greatest value. Abnormalities on color Doppler imaging and the presence of abnormal blood vessels were the best predictors of placenta accreta spectrum in high-risk women. However, this is not always an objective criterion and clarification is needed [14].

Poder et al. (2020) believe that in transabdominal 2D ultrasound, disruption, thickening or irregularity of the serosa–bladder interface is a sign of placenta accreta spectrum with high sensitivity and specificity. The reliability of the sign increases with increasing depth of invasion. Special attention is paid to increased placental vascularity, subplacental vascularity and vascularity at the serosa–bladder interface. Vascular lacunae in the placenta are thought to be due to the effect of pulsatile blood flow, high-speed blood flow from the myometrium into the lacunae. The presence of placental lacunae on second trimester ultrasound is proven to have the highest sensitivity and positive predictive value for determining placenta accreta spectrum. Three-dimensional color Doppler ultrasound is reported to aid in the diagnosis and demonstrate multiple coherent vessels involving the placental base, which has been shown to be a reliable prognostic sign [20].

The study by Jauniaux et al. (2017), which included 3889 pregnant women with placenta previa or low-lying placenta and a history of cesarean section, identified 328 (8.4%) cases of placenta accreta, of which 298 (90.9%) were diagnosed prenatally by ultrasound. The incidence of placenta accreta spectrum was 4.1% in women who had one cesarean section and 13.3% in women who had two cesarean sections. The overall value of ultrasound for the antenatal diagnosis of placenta accreta spectrum was higher in prospective studies; sensitivity was 97.0% (95% CI 93.0, 99.0), specificity 97.0% (95% CI 97.0, 98.0), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) 228.5 (95% CI 67.2, 776.9). In retrospective studies, sensitivity was 88.0% (95% CI 81.0, 93.0), specificity was 90.0% (95% CI 88.0, 93.0), and DOR was 80.8 (95% CI 13.0, 501.4). Some signs, such as multiple placental lacunae and placental hernia, as well as focal placental exophytic mass, were more frequently associated with deeper placental invasion of the myometrium. In the largest prospective studies, positive correlations were found between the cumulative incidence of more invasive forms of the placenta accreta spectrum and the sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound imaging, but not with the diagnostic odds ratio values. The authors found no data on ultrasound screening for placenta accreta spectrum during routine second trimester ultrasound in non-specialized ultrasound departments. In contrast to MRI, ultrasound results depend on the experience of a specialist, and therefore single-center studies often overestimate the accuracy of ultrasound because it is performed by trained specialists in specialized centers, but the total number of cases of placenta accreta spectrum diagnosed prenatally in some cohorts is small [21].

D’Antonio et al. (2014) compared the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound and MRI. They only included studies that used both imaging modalities on an equal number of women, regardless of knowledge of the ultrasound diagnosis. Histopathologic data and/or surgical records were used as the gold standard. The depth of invasion was classified as no invasion, placenta accreta, placenta increta, and placenta percreta. The topography of placental invasion was classified as invasion into S1, S2, or parametrium. MRI and ultrasound had similar diagnostic value in detecting placenta accreta spectrum. Only four studies performed MRI and ultrasound in women in the same risk group, and the radiologists interpreting the images were blinded to both the ultrasound results and the final diagnosis. When the analysis was stratified by these studies alone, MRI showed a sensitivity of 92.9% (95% CI 82.4%, 97.3%), specificity of 93.5% (95% CI 82.2%, 97.8%), positive likelihood ratio (LR+) of 14.22 (95% CI 4.92, 41.1), negative likelihood ratio (LR-) of 0.08 (95% CI 0.03, 0.20), and DOR of 186.0 (95% CI 40.0, 864.5). Ultrasound showed a sensitivity of 87.8% (95% CI 75.8%, 94.3%), specificity of 96.3% (95% CI 74.4%, 99.6%), LR+ 24.0 (95% CI 2.81, 205.0), LR- 24.0 (95% CI 2.81, 205.0). There was no significant difference in sensitivity (p=0.24) or specificity (p=0.91) between ultrasound and MRI for detection of the placenta accreta spectrum. It was not possible to perform a meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound and MRI in assessing the depth and topography of placental invasion because only one study could provide different data on their diagnostic value [13].

A systematic review and meta-analysis by De Oliveira Carniello et al. (2022) included 17 studies involving 1,301 women with available MRI and ultrasound data. The study population included 457 cases of placenta accreta spectrum diagnosed by the gold standard method (intraoperative or histopathologic analysis). The authors found no statistically significant difference between two methods and also reported a high degree of heterogeneity in the sensitivity and specificity data of ultrasound and MRI across studies [22].

Table 2 presents statistical data on sensitivity and specificity from meta-analyses and studies.

 

Table 2. Sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound signs of placenta accreta

Parameter

Grade of invasion

Sensitivity

Specificity

Overall efficiency

85.7% (95% CI 77.2, 91.4) [13]

90.72% (95% CI 87.2, 93.6) [14]

97.0% (95% CI 93.0, 99.0) [21]

83.8 (95% CI 78.6, 87.9) [22]

83% [26]

73.7% [27]

90.7% [31]

88.6% (95% CI 73.0, 95.7) [13]

96.94% (95% CI 96.3, 97.5) [14]

97.0% (95% CI 97.0, 98.0) [21]

83.1 (95% CI 77.0, 87.8) [22]

95% [26]

96.3% [27]

Performance of color Doppler signal

90.74% (95% CI 85.2, 94.7) [14]

87.68% (95% CI 84.6, 90.4) [14]

Determining the depth of invasion

Placenta accreta

90.6% (95% CI 80.7, 96.5) [19]

97.1% (95% CI 95.4, 98.3) [19]

Placenta increta

93.0% (95% CI 80.9, 98.5) [19]

98.4% (95% CI 97.0, 99.2) [19]

Placenta accreta/increta

89.5% (95% CI 73.2, 96.3) [19]

94.7% (95% CI 91.0, 96.9) [19]

Placenta percreta

81.2% (95% CI 51.8, 94.6) [19]

98,9% (95% ДИ 95,0–100) [19] / 98.9% (95% CI 95.0, 100.0) [19]

Determining the topography of invasion

S1

93.4% (95% CI 64.7, 100.0) [19]

 

S2

90.3% (95% CI 80.7, 97.4) [19]

 

Loss of clear area

Placenta accrete

74.9% (95% CI 33.5, 94.6) [19]

92.0% (95% CI 68.8, 98.3) [19]

 

Placenta increta

91.6% (95% CI 59.9, 98.8) [19]

76.9% (95% CI 45.4, 93.0) [19]

 

Placenta percreta

88.1% (95% CI 64.7, 96.8) [19]

71.1% (95% CI 42.2, 89.2) [19]

 

General parameters

66.24% (95% CI 58.3, 73.6) [14]

95.76% (95% CI 94.9, 96.5) [14]

Abnormal placental lacunae

Placenta accreta

74.8% (95% CI 55.4, 87.6) [19]

87.9% (95% CI 52.6, 97.9) [19]

 

Placenta increta

88.6% (95% CI 55.3, 98.0) [19]

77.4% (95% CI 46.8, 93.0) [19]

 

Placenta percreta

76.3% (95% CI 42.2, 93.4) [19]

74.0% (95% CI 45.0, 90.9) [19]

 

General parameters

77.43% (95% CI 70.9, 83.1) [14]

95.02% (95% CI 94.1, 95.8) [14]

Abnormal structure of the interface between the uterus and the bladder wall.

Placenta accreta

17.0% (95% CI 0.06, 85.8) [19]

96.8% (95% CI 86.0, 99.3) [19]

Placenta increta

46.1% (95% CI 11.0, 85.5) [19]

97.3% (95% CI 91.0, 99.3) [19]

Placenta percreta

62.0% (95% CI 23.2, 89.8) [19]

62.0% (95% CI 23.2, 89.8) [19]

 

General parameters

49.66% (95% CI 41.4, 58.0) [14]

99.75% (95% CI 99.5, 99.9) [14]

Thinned myometrium

Placenta accreta

100% (95% CI 31.0, 100.0) [19]

85.0% (95% CI 72.9, 92.5) [19]

 

Placenta increta

100% (95% CI 47.8, 100.0) [19]

74.3% (95% CI 62.4, 84.0) [19]

 

Placenta percreta

85.7% (95% CI 57.2, 98.2) [19]

76.0% (95% CI 66.4, 84.0) [19]

Protrusion of placental fragments (placental hernia)

The sign was identified by Collins et al.

[16, 17]

  

Focal exophytic mass

Placenta percreta

16.7% (95% CI 0.42, 64.2) [19]

100% (95% CI 88.6, 100.0) [19]

Placental lacunar flow

Placenta accreta

81.2% (95% CI 57.2, 93.3) [19]

84.0% (95% CI 65.4, 93.6) [19]

 

Placenta increta

84.3% (95% CI 50.8, 96.5) [19]

79.7% (95% CI 57.4, 91.9) [19]

 

Placenta percreta

45.2% (95% CI 27.3, 64.0) [19]

75.3% (95% CI 69.8, 80.2) [19]

Hypervascularity of the vesicouterine area

Placenta accreta

12.3% (95% CI 2.59, 100.0) [19]

90.8% (95% CI 75.2, 97.0) [19]

Placenta increta

94.4% (95% CI 29.2, 100.0) [19]

88.0% (95% CI 72.8, 95.3) [19]

Placenta percreta

86.2% (95% CI 60.0, 96.3) [19]

88.2% (95% CI 71.9, 95.6) [19]

General parameters

90.74% (95% CI 85.2, 94.7) [14]

87.7% (95% CI 84.6, 90.4) [14]

Subplacental hypervascularity

Placenta accreta

40.7% (95% CI 22.4, 61.2) [19]

95.5% (95% CI 91.3, 98.0) [19]

 

Placenta increta

17.4% (95% CI 5.0, 38.8) [19]

93.8% (95% CI 88.8, 97.0) [19]

 

Placenta percreta

40.0% (95% CI 12.2, 73.8) [19]

92.5% (95% CI 85.1, 96.9) [19]

 

Ultrasound is the most commonly used imaging modality to diagnose placenta accreta spectrum because it is inexpensive, noninvasive, and rapid. Color and power Doppler ultrasound and the use of a transvaginal probe appear to improve the value of conventional ultrasound in assessing placenta accreta spectrum. Color and power Doppler ultrasound can identify areas of increased vascularity with dilated blood vessels crossing the placenta and uterine wall [13]. A transvaginal probe may improve near-field resolution at the interface between the placenta and lower uterine segment, especially in cases of placenta previa or posterior placenta [23–24]. High-frequency transducers are reported to improve the spatial resolution of superficial structures, thereby improving the accuracy of ultrasound [25].

CONCLUSION

Prenatal ultrasound has good prognostic accuracy in diagnosing placenta accreta spectrum in high-risk women. However, isolated ultrasound signs should be treated with caution. The discovery of one sign is likely to increase the potential to discover others, since signs are not evaluated in isolation. It should be noted that vascular lacunae may be present even in women with placenta previa without placenta accreta spectrum, and the lower uterine segment may appear as a thin line on transabdominal ultrasound in the late third trimester, making assessment of the myometrial-placental interface difficult. A higher grade of the placenta accreta spectrum is associated with destruction of the outer third of the myometrium and serous membrane of the uterus, followed by involvement of the bladder. This condition can be diagnosed using ultrasound by examining the interface between myometrium and bladder, which is normally echogenic and smooth. This condition is a reliable sign for making the diagnosis, but its absence does not rule out lower grades of the placenta accreta spectrum. Some signs, such as multiple placental lacunae and placental hernia, as well as focal placental exophytic mass, were more frequently associated with deeper placental invasion of the myometrium. Color and power Doppler ultrasound and the use of a transvaginal probe, improve the effectiveness of conventional ultrasound in assessing placenta accreta spectrum. High-frequency transducers improve the spatial resolution of superficial structures, thereby improving the accuracy of ultrasound.

Although ultrasound can accurately detect placenta accreta spectrum, its diagnostic value in determining the severity of placenta accreta spectrum needs to be established. Approximately 20% of women with placenta percreta cannot be correctly diagnosed, so more accurate predictive models need to be developed to diagnose severe forms of the placenta accreta spectrum. The diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound in detecting placenta accreta spectrum may be reduced by several clinical parameters, including unfavorable placental location (i.e., posterior one) and high body mass index (BMI). Later gestational age at ultrasound (>30 weeks) may affect the detection of abnormalities; heterogeneous signal intensity and infarcts are more common in later pregnancy due to physiologic aging of the placenta.

Some authors believe that there is no significant difference in the diagnostic value of ultrasound and MRI in placenta accreta spectrum. Both ultrasound and MRI are highly specific and sensitive methods for diagnosing (or excluding) placenta accreta spectrum. In contrast to MRI, ultrasound results depend on the experience of a specialist, and therefore single-center studies often overestimate the accuracy of ultrasound because it is performed by trained specialists in specialized centers, but the total number of cases of placenta accreta spectrum diagnosed prenatally in some cohorts is small, leading to inaccurate results. It is necessary to continue studying the diagnostic methods for placenta accreta spectrum to select the effective obstetrical strategy for management of pregnant women with these disorders.

ADDITIONAL INFO

Authors’ contribution. All authors confirm that their authorship meets the international ICMJE criteria (all authors made a substantial contribution to the conception of the work, acquisition, analysis, interpretation of data for the work, drafting and revising the work, final approval of the version to be published and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work).

Funding source. This study was not supported by any external sources of funding.

Competing interests. The authors declares that there are no obvious and potential conflicts of interest associated with the publication of this article.

×

About the authors

Viktoriya A. Efimova

I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University

Email: efimova299@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-7462-6928

student

Russian Federation, Moscow

Andrei V. Murashko

I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University

Author for correspondence.
Email: murashkoa@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0663-2909

MD, Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor

Russian Federation, Moscow

References

  1. De Mucio B, Serruya S, Alemán A, Castellano G, Sosa CG. A systematic review and meta-analysis of cesarean delivery and other uterine surgery as risk factors for placenta accreta. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2019;147(3):281–291. doi: 10.1002/ijgo.12948
  2. Silver RM, Branch DW. Placenta Accreta Spectrum. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(16):1529–1536. doi: 10.1056/NEJMcp1709324
  3. Jauniaux E, Bunce C, Grønbeck L, Langhoff-Roos J. Prevalence and main outcomes of placenta accreta spectrum: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019;221(3):208–218. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.01.233
  4. Thurn L, Lindqvist PG, Jakobsson M, et al. Abnormally invasive placenta-prevalence, risk factors and antenatal suspicion: results from a large population-based pregnancy cohort study in the Nordic countries. BJOG. 2016;123(8):1348–1355. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.13547
  5. Fitzpatrick KE, Sellers S, Spark P, et al. Incidence and risk factors for placenta accreta/increta/percreta in the UK: a national case-control study. PLoS One. 2012;7(12):e52893. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0052893
  6. Silver RM, Landon MB, Rouse DJ, et al. Maternal morbidity associated with multiple repeat cesarean deliveries. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107(6):1226–1232. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000219750.79480.84
  7. Jauniaux E, Grønbeck L, Bunce C, Langhoff-Roos J, Collins SL. Epidemiology of placenta previa accreta: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2019;9(11):e031193. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031193
  8. Donovan BM, Shainker SA. Placenta Accreta Spectrum. Neoreviews. 2021;22(11):e722–e733. doi: 10.1542/neo.22-11-e722
  9. Solheim KN, Esakoff TF, Little SE, et al. The effect of cesarean delivery rates on the future incidence of placenta previa, placenta accreta, and maternal mortality. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2011;24(11):1341–1346. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2011.553695
  10. Jauniaux E, Bhide A, Kennedy A, et al. FIGO consensus guidelines on placenta accreta spectrum disorders: Prenatal diagnosis and screening. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2018;140(3):274–280. doi: 10.1002/ijgo.12408
  11. Zhong W, Zhu F, Li S, et al. Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes After Planned or Emergency Delivery for Placenta Accreta Spectrum: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front Med (Lausanne). 2021;8:731412. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2021.731412
  12. Comstock CH, Bronsteen RA. The antenatal diagnosis of placenta accrete. BJOG. 2014;121(2):171–181. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.12557
  13. D’Antonio F, Iacovella C, Palacios-Jaraquemada J, et al. Prenatal identification of invasive placentation using magnetic resonance imaging: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014;44(1):8–16. doi: 10.1002/uog.13327
  14. D’Antonio F, Iacovella C, Bhide A. Prenatal identification of invasive placentation using ultrasound: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013;42(5):509–517. doi: 10.1002/uog.13194
  15. Rac MW, Dashe JS, Wells CE, et al. Ultrasound predictors of placental invasion: the Placenta Accreta Index. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;212(3):343.e1–e7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.10.022
  16. Alfirevic Z, Tang A-W, Collins SL, Robson SC, Palacios-Jaraquemada J; Ad-hoc International AIP Expert Group. Pro forma for ultrasound reporting in suspected abnormally invasive placenta (AIP): an international consensus. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016;47(3):276–278. doi: 10.1002/uog.15810
  17. Collins SL, Ashcroft A, Braun T, et al.; European Working Group on Abnormally Invasive Placenta (EW-AIP). Proposal for standardized ultrasound descriptors of abnormally invasive placenta (AIP). Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016;47(3):271–275. doi: 10.1002/uog.14952
  18. Palacios-Jaraquemada JM, Bruno CH, Martín E. MRI in the diagnosis and surgical management of abnormal placentation. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2013;92(4):392–397. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01527.x
  19. Pagani G, Cali G, Acharya G, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound in detecting the severity of abnormally invasive placentation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2018;97(1):25–37. doi: 10.1111/aogs.13238
  20. Expert Panel on Women’s Imaging; Poder L, Weinstein S, Maturen KE, et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Placenta Accreta Spectrum Disorder. J Am Coll Radiol. 2020;17(5S):S207–S214. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2020.01.031
  21. Jauniaux E, Bhide A. Prenatal ultrasound diagnosis and outcome of placenta previa accreta after cesarean delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;217(1):27–36. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.02.050
  22. De Oliveira Carniello M, Oliveira Brito LG, Sarian LO, Bennini JR. Diagnosis of placenta accreta spectrum in high-risk women using ultrasonography or magnetic resonance imaging: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2022;59(4):428–436. doi: 10.1002/uog.24861
  23. Chou MM, Tseng JJ, Ho ES. The application of three-dimensional color power Doppler ultrasound in the depiction of abnormal uteroplacental angioarchitecture in placenta previa percreta. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2002;19(6):625–627. doi: 10.1046/j.1469-0705.2002.00731_2.x
  24. Lerner JP, Deane S, Timor-Tritsch IE. Characterization of placenta accreta using transvaginal sonography and color Doppler imaging. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1995;5(3):198–201. doi: 10.1046/j.1469-0705.1995.05030198.x
  25. Benacerraf BR, Shipp TD, Bromley B. Is a full bladder still necessary for pelvic sonography? J Ultrasound Med. 2000;19(4):237–241. doi: 10.7863/jum.2000.19.4.237
  26. Meng X, Xie L, Song W. Comparing the diagnostic value of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging for placenta accreta: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2013;39(11):1958–1965. doi: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2013.05.017
  27. Latyshkevich OA, Kurtser MA, Savel’eva GM, et al. Antenatal diagnosis of placenta accreta in women with a history of cesarean section. Voprosy ginekologii, akusherstva i perinatologii. 2013;12(6):36–41. (In Russ.) EDN: RUFXTF
  28. Garmazhapova AD, Preymak SV. Features of diagnosis and delivery of placenta accrete. In: The Medicine of Tomorrow. Proceedings of the XXI Interregional scientific and practical conference of students and young scientists with international participation. Chita, 2022 April 19–22. Chita: Chita State Medical Academy; 2022. P. 107–108. (In Russ.) EDN LCFIBI
  29. Preymak SV. Placenta accreta: features of diagnosis and delivery. In: The Medicine of Tomorrow. Proceedings of the XX Interregional scientific and practical conference of students and young scientists. Chita, 2021 April 20–23. Chita: Chita State Medical Academy; 2021. P. 84–85. (In Russ.) EDN GUFRWM
  30. Vishnevskaya DO, Kasymova DR, Galkina ON, Zhdanova VYu. Assessment of the placental site (ultrasound markers) in complete placenta previa for the purpose of diagnosing placenta accreta into the myometrium. In: National Projects: Challenges and Solutions. Proceedings of the 55th Interregional scientific and practical medical conference. Ulyanovsk: 2020 May 14–15. Ulyanovsk; 2020. P. 14–16. (In Russ.) EDN SNBBQN
  31. Petrov YuA, Shatalov AE, Kupina AD. Placenta regrowth: prediction and blood conservation. In: A Healthy Mother is a Healthy Offspring. Collection of materials of the intra-university scientific and practical conference. Rostov-on-Don, 2020 February 06. Rostov-on-Don; 2020. P. 343–350. (In Russ.) EDN IIDDXP
  32. Khasanov AA. Diagnosis, prevention and organ-preserving method of delivery in pregnant women with placenta accreta. Kazan Medical Journal. 2016;97(4):477–485. doi: 10.17750/KMJ2015-477

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML

Copyright (c) 2024 Eco-Vector

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ:
ПИ № ФС 77 - 86335 от 11.12.2023 г.  
СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ:
ЭЛ № ФС 77 - 80633 от 15.03.2021 г.