Plasenta previa olgularında gebelik sonuçları

Amaç: Plasenta previa olgularında maternal demografik özelliklerin, perinatal sonuçların ve obstetrik komplikasyonların değerlendirilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Gereç ve Yöntem: Kliniğimizde Ocak 2009-Haziran 2013 tarihleri arasında takip edilen toplam 69 plasenta previa olgusu dosya kayıtlarından retrospektif olarak incelendi. Maternal ortalama yaş, gravida, parite özellikleri; gebelik haftaları, doğum şekli, doğum kilosu, 1. ve 5. dakika apgar skorlaması, gestasyonel diyabetes mellitus (GDM), pregestasyonel diyabet, polihidramniyos, oligohidramniyos, intrauterin gelişme geriliği (IUGR), kan transfüzyon gerekliliği, antepartum kanama sıklığı, peripartum histerektomi olup olmadığı, plasental invazyon bulgusu, in utero mort fetalis (IUMF) ve neonatal ölüm gibi komplikasyonlar incelendi. Ayrıca olguların obstetrik öyküleri, geçirilmiş sezaryen sayıları incelendi. Bulgular: Plasenta previa olgularında ortalama yaş 32.19±4.58 (22-40 yaş), gravida 2.29±1.55, parite 0.96±1.18 olarak saptandı. Doğum sırasında ortalama gebelik haftası 30.99±6.96 olarak tespit edildi. 22 olguda (31.9%) geçirilmiş sezaryen öyküsü mevcuttu. Plasenta previa olgularında ortalama bebek doğum kilosu 2854.38±815.72 gr (500 gr-4300 gr), 1. ve 5. Dakika apgar skorları sırası ile 9.30±1.57 ve 9.70±0.95 olarak tespit edildi. 4 olguda invazyon bulguları saptandı, 5 olguda invazyon bulguları nedeni ile peripartum histerektomi yapıldı. Sonuç: Plasenta previa, maternal ve neonatal mortalite ve morbiditenin önemli nedenleri arasında yer almaktadır. Geçirilmiş sezaryen ameliyatları, grand multiparite, uterin anomaliler, ileri maternal yaş tanımlanmış en önemli risk faktörleridir. Ülkemiz koşulları göz önüne alındığında, özellikle çevre hastanelerde, plasenta previa açısından risk grubunda olan gebelerde sezaryen endikasyonu verilirken dikkatli olunmalı; hasta uyumu düşük, yeterli antenatal takip alamayacak hasta grubunda risk faktörleri de var ise, mümkünse gebelik tespit edilir edilmez koruyucu tedbirler alınmalıdır.

Pregnancy outcomes in patients with placenta previa

Aim: To evaluate the maternal demographic features, perinatal outcomes and obstetric complications in cases of placenta previa. Materials and Methods: The data of 69 women with placenta previa followed up in our clinic between January 2009 and June 2013 were evaluated restrospectively through file records. Maternal mean age, gravidity, parity, gestational weeks, mode of delivery, birth weight, apgar scores, gestational diabetes (GDM), pregestational diabetes, polihydramnios, oligohydramnios, intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR), need of transfusion, the frequency of antenatal vaginal bleeding, peripartum hysterectomy need, placental invasion findings, in utero mort fetalis (IUMF) and neonatal mortality were all evaluated. In addition, obstetric history and the number of prior cesarean deliveries were evaluated. Results: The mean age, gravida and parity were 32.19±4.58 (22-40 years), 2.29±1.55, and 0.96±1.18 respectively. The mean gestational week was 30.99±6.96. 22 cases (31.9%) had prior cesarean delivery. The mean birth weight was 2854.38±815.72 g (500 g-4300 g), apgar scores at 1 and 5 minutes were 9.30±1.57 and 9.70±0.95 respectively. Four cases had placental invasion findings and 5 cases needed peripartum hysterectomy. Conclusion: Placenta previa still remains an important cause of maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality. Prior cesarean operations, grandmultiparity, uterin anomalies, advanced maternal age are well-known risk factors. With respect to Turkey, especially in peripheric hospitals, attention should be directed to the cesarean indications and preventive measures should be taken immediately following known pregnancy for women with low compliance and those who have poor antenatal surveillance.

___

  • 1. Faiz AS, Ananth CV. Etiology and risk factors for placenta previa: An overview and meta-analysis of observational studies. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2003;13(3):175-90.
  • 2. Tuzovic L, Djelmis J, Ilijic M. Obstetric risk factors associated with placenta previa development: Case-control study. CMJ 2003;44(6):728-33.
  • 3. Solheim K, Esakoff T, 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):1341-6.
  • 4. Jauniaux E, Jurkovic D. Placenta accreta: Pathogenesis of a 20th century iatrogenic uterine disease. Placenta 2012;33(4):244- 51.
  • 5. Akdeniz N, Yalınkaya A, Akay H ve ark. Plasenta previa: Obstetrik risk faktörleri ve perinatal sonuçlar. Perinatoloji Dergisi 2004:12(3):113-6.
  • 6. Chapman MG, Furness ET, Jones WR, et al. Significance of the location of placenta site in early pregnancy. BJOG 1989;86:846-8.
  • 7. McLure N, Dornan JC. Early identification of placenta previa. BJOG 1990;97;959-61.
  • 8. Carbillon L. Does the presence of a uterine scar influence the site of placental implantation? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013;42(1):121.
  • 9. Chelmow D, Andrew DE, Baker ER. Maternal cigarette smoking and placenta previa. Obstet Gynecol 1996;87(5 Pt 1):703-6.
  • 10. Sheiner E, Shoham-Vardi I, Hallak M, Hershkowitz R, Katz M, Mazor M. Placenta previa: Obstetric risk factors and pregnancy outcome. J Matern Fetal Med 2001;10(6):414-9.
  • 11. Parazzini F, Dindelli M, Luchini L, et al. Risk factors for placenta previa. Placenta 1994;15(3):321-6.
  • 12. Gilliam M, Rosenberg D, Davis F. The likelihood of placenta previa with greater number of cesarean deliveries and higher parity. Obstet Gynecol 2002;99(6):976-80.
  • 13. Abu-Heija A, El-Jallad F, Ziadeh S. Placenta previa: Effect of age, gravidity, parity and previous cesarean section. Gynecol Obstet Invest 1999;47(1):6-8.
  • 14. Hershkowitz R, Fraser D, Mazor M, Leiberman JR. One or multiple previous cesarean sections are associated with similar increased frequency of placenta previa. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1995;62(2):185-8.
  • 15. Gorodeski IG, Bahari CM. The effect of placenta previa localization upon maternal and fetal-neonatal outcome. J Perinat Med 1987;15(2):169-77.
  • 16. Ananth CV, Demissie K, Smulian JC, Vintzileos AM. Relationship among placenta previa, fetal growth restriction, and preterm delivery: a population-based study. Obstet Gynecol 2001;98(2):299-306.
  • 17. Wolf EJ, Mallozzi A, Rodis JF, Egan JF, Vintzileos AM, Campbell WA. Placenta previa is not an independent risk factor for a small for gestational age infant. Obstet Gynecol 1991;77(5):707-9.
  • 18. Crane JM, van den Hof MC, Dodds L, Armson BA, Liston R. Neonatal outcomes in placenta previa. Obstet Gynecol 1999;93(4):541-4.
  • 19. Jang DG, We JS, Shin JU, et al. Maternal outcomes according to placental position in placental previa. Int J Med Sci 2011;8(5):439-44.
  • 20. Horgan R. Placental praevia, placental accreta and vasa praevia. Obstet Gynecol 2006;108(3 Pt 1):693-4.
  • 21. Cotton DB, Read JA, Paul RH, Quilligan EJ. The conservative aggressive management of placenta previa. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1980;137(6):687-95.
  • 22. Macafee CH, Millar WG, Harley G. Maternal and foetal mortality in placenta praevia. J Obstet Gynaecol Br Emp 1962;69(3):203-12.
  • 23. Crenshaw C Jr, Jones DE, Parker RT. Placenta previa: A survey of twenty years experience with improved perinatal survival by expectant therapy and cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1973;28(7):461-70.
  • 24. Kassem GA, Alzahrani AK. Maternal and neonatal outcomes of placenta previa and placenta accreta: Three years of experience with a two-consultant approach. Int J Womens Health. 2013;28(5):803-10.
  • 25. Balayla J, Bondarenko HD. Placenta accreta and the risk of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. J Perinat Med 2013;41(2):141-9.