Cargando…

Epidemiology of placenta previa accreta: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence and incidence of placenta previa complicated by placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) and to examine the different criteria being used for the diagnosis. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Google Scholar, ClinicalTrials.gov and MEDLINE...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jauniaux, Eric, Grønbeck, Lene, Bunce, Catey, Langhoff-Roos, Jens, Collins, Sally L
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6858111/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31722942
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031193
_version_ 1783470883853041664
author Jauniaux, Eric
Grønbeck, Lene
Bunce, Catey
Langhoff-Roos, Jens
Collins, Sally L
author_facet Jauniaux, Eric
Grønbeck, Lene
Bunce, Catey
Langhoff-Roos, Jens
Collins, Sally L
author_sort Jauniaux, Eric
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence and incidence of placenta previa complicated by placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) and to examine the different criteria being used for the diagnosis. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Google Scholar, ClinicalTrials.gov and MEDLINE were searched between August 1982 and September 2018. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies reporting on placenta previa complicated by PAS diagnosed in a defined obstetric population. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers performed the data extraction using a predefined protocol and assessed the risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies, with difference agreed by consensus. The primary outcomes were overall prevalence of placenta previa, incidence of PAS according to the type of placenta previa and the reported clinical outcomes, including the number of peripartum hysterectomies and direct maternal mortality. The secondary outcomes included the criteria used for the prenatal ultrasound diagnosis of placenta previa and the criteria used to diagnose and grade PAS at birth. RESULTS: A total of 258 articles were reviewed and 13 retrospective and 7 prospective studies were included in the analysis, which reported on 587 women with placenta previa and PAS. The meta-analysis indicated a significant (p<0.001) heterogeneity between study estimates for the prevalence of placenta previa, the prevalence of placenta previa with PAS and the incidence of PAS in the placenta previa cohort. The median prevalence of placenta previa was 0.56% (IQR 0.39–1.24) whereas the median prevalence of placenta previa with PAS was 0.07% (IQR 0.05–0.16). The incidence of PAS in women with a placenta previa was 11.10% (IQR 7.65–17.35). CONCLUSIONS: The high heterogeneity in qualitative and diagnostic data between studies emphasises the need to implement standardised protocols for the diagnoses of both placenta previa and PAS, including the type of placenta previa and grade of villous invasiveness. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017068589
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6858111
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68581112019-12-03 Epidemiology of placenta previa accreta: a systematic review and meta-analysis Jauniaux, Eric Grønbeck, Lene Bunce, Catey Langhoff-Roos, Jens Collins, Sally L BMJ Open Epidemiology OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence and incidence of placenta previa complicated by placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) and to examine the different criteria being used for the diagnosis. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Google Scholar, ClinicalTrials.gov and MEDLINE were searched between August 1982 and September 2018. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies reporting on placenta previa complicated by PAS diagnosed in a defined obstetric population. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers performed the data extraction using a predefined protocol and assessed the risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies, with difference agreed by consensus. The primary outcomes were overall prevalence of placenta previa, incidence of PAS according to the type of placenta previa and the reported clinical outcomes, including the number of peripartum hysterectomies and direct maternal mortality. The secondary outcomes included the criteria used for the prenatal ultrasound diagnosis of placenta previa and the criteria used to diagnose and grade PAS at birth. RESULTS: A total of 258 articles were reviewed and 13 retrospective and 7 prospective studies were included in the analysis, which reported on 587 women with placenta previa and PAS. The meta-analysis indicated a significant (p<0.001) heterogeneity between study estimates for the prevalence of placenta previa, the prevalence of placenta previa with PAS and the incidence of PAS in the placenta previa cohort. The median prevalence of placenta previa was 0.56% (IQR 0.39–1.24) whereas the median prevalence of placenta previa with PAS was 0.07% (IQR 0.05–0.16). The incidence of PAS in women with a placenta previa was 11.10% (IQR 7.65–17.35). CONCLUSIONS: The high heterogeneity in qualitative and diagnostic data between studies emphasises the need to implement standardised protocols for the diagnoses of both placenta previa and PAS, including the type of placenta previa and grade of villous invasiveness. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017068589 BMJ Publishing Group 2019-11-12 /pmc/articles/PMC6858111/ /pubmed/31722942 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031193 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Epidemiology
Jauniaux, Eric
Grønbeck, Lene
Bunce, Catey
Langhoff-Roos, Jens
Collins, Sally L
Epidemiology of placenta previa accreta: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Epidemiology of placenta previa accreta: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Epidemiology of placenta previa accreta: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Epidemiology of placenta previa accreta: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Epidemiology of placenta previa accreta: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Epidemiology of placenta previa accreta: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort epidemiology of placenta previa accreta: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Epidemiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6858111/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31722942
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031193
work_keys_str_mv AT jauniauxeric epidemiologyofplacentapreviaaccretaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT grønbecklene epidemiologyofplacentapreviaaccretaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT buncecatey epidemiologyofplacentapreviaaccretaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT langhoffroosjens epidemiologyofplacentapreviaaccretaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT collinssallyl epidemiologyofplacentapreviaaccretaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis