Diagnosis and morbidity of placenta accreta

T. F. Esakoff, T. N. Sparks, A. J. Kaimal, L. H. Kim, V. A. Feldstein, R. B. Goldstein, Y. W. Cheng, Aaron Caughey

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

70 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To examine the diagnostic precision of ultrasound examination for placenta accreta in women with placenta previa and to compare the morbidity associated with accreta to that of previa alone. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of all women with previa with/without accreta examined at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) between 2002 and 2008. The sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV) of ultrasound examination for the diagnosis of accreta were calculated and compared with results from similar studies in the literature. Univariable analysis was used to compare clinical outcomes. Results: The PPV of an ultrasound diagnosis of accreta was 68% andNPV was 98%.Ultrasound had a sensitivity of 89.5%. Compared with previa alone, accreta had an odds ratio (OR) of 89.6 (95% CI, 19.44-412.95) for estimated blood loss >2 L, an OR of 29.6 (95% CI, 8.20-107.00) for transfusion and an OR of 8.52 (95% CI, 2.58-28.11) for length of hospital stay >4 days. Conclusion: Placenta accreta is associated with greater morbidity than is placenta previa alone. Ultrasound examination is a good diagnostic test for accreta in women with placenta previa. This is consistent with most other studies in the literature.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)324-327
Number of pages4
JournalUltrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology
Volume37
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2011

Fingerprint

Placenta Accreta
Placenta Previa
Odds Ratio
Morbidity
Length of Stay
San Francisco
Routine Diagnostic Tests
Ultrasonography
Cohort Studies
Retrospective Studies
Sensitivity and Specificity

Keywords

  • Placenta accreta
  • Placenta previa
  • Ultrasound

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology
  • Reproductive Medicine
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Esakoff, T. F., Sparks, T. N., Kaimal, A. J., Kim, L. H., Feldstein, V. A., Goldstein, R. B., ... Caughey, A. (2011). Diagnosis and morbidity of placenta accreta. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 37(3), 324-327. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.8827

Diagnosis and morbidity of placenta accreta. / Esakoff, T. F.; Sparks, T. N.; Kaimal, A. J.; Kim, L. H.; Feldstein, V. A.; Goldstein, R. B.; Cheng, Y. W.; Caughey, Aaron.

In: Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vol. 37, No. 3, 03.2011, p. 324-327.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Esakoff, TF, Sparks, TN, Kaimal, AJ, Kim, LH, Feldstein, VA, Goldstein, RB, Cheng, YW & Caughey, A 2011, 'Diagnosis and morbidity of placenta accreta', Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 324-327. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.8827
Esakoff TF, Sparks TN, Kaimal AJ, Kim LH, Feldstein VA, Goldstein RB et al. Diagnosis and morbidity of placenta accreta. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2011 Mar;37(3):324-327. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.8827
Esakoff, T. F. ; Sparks, T. N. ; Kaimal, A. J. ; Kim, L. H. ; Feldstein, V. A. ; Goldstein, R. B. ; Cheng, Y. W. ; Caughey, Aaron. / Diagnosis and morbidity of placenta accreta. In: Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2011 ; Vol. 37, No. 3. pp. 324-327.
@article{2fd0d2026b3045738c05577194c17b68,
title = "Diagnosis and morbidity of placenta accreta",
abstract = "Objective: To examine the diagnostic precision of ultrasound examination for placenta accreta in women with placenta previa and to compare the morbidity associated with accreta to that of previa alone. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of all women with previa with/without accreta examined at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) between 2002 and 2008. The sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV) of ultrasound examination for the diagnosis of accreta were calculated and compared with results from similar studies in the literature. Univariable analysis was used to compare clinical outcomes. Results: The PPV of an ultrasound diagnosis of accreta was 68{\%} andNPV was 98{\%}.Ultrasound had a sensitivity of 89.5{\%}. Compared with previa alone, accreta had an odds ratio (OR) of 89.6 (95{\%} CI, 19.44-412.95) for estimated blood loss >2 L, an OR of 29.6 (95{\%} CI, 8.20-107.00) for transfusion and an OR of 8.52 (95{\%} CI, 2.58-28.11) for length of hospital stay >4 days. Conclusion: Placenta accreta is associated with greater morbidity than is placenta previa alone. Ultrasound examination is a good diagnostic test for accreta in women with placenta previa. This is consistent with most other studies in the literature.",
keywords = "Placenta accreta, Placenta previa, Ultrasound",
author = "Esakoff, {T. F.} and Sparks, {T. N.} and Kaimal, {A. J.} and Kim, {L. H.} and Feldstein, {V. A.} and Goldstein, {R. B.} and Cheng, {Y. W.} and Aaron Caughey",
year = "2011",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1002/uog.8827",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "37",
pages = "324--327",
journal = "Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology",
issn = "0960-7692",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Ltd",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Diagnosis and morbidity of placenta accreta

AU - Esakoff, T. F.

AU - Sparks, T. N.

AU - Kaimal, A. J.

AU - Kim, L. H.

AU - Feldstein, V. A.

AU - Goldstein, R. B.

AU - Cheng, Y. W.

AU - Caughey, Aaron

PY - 2011/3

Y1 - 2011/3

N2 - Objective: To examine the diagnostic precision of ultrasound examination for placenta accreta in women with placenta previa and to compare the morbidity associated with accreta to that of previa alone. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of all women with previa with/without accreta examined at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) between 2002 and 2008. The sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV) of ultrasound examination for the diagnosis of accreta were calculated and compared with results from similar studies in the literature. Univariable analysis was used to compare clinical outcomes. Results: The PPV of an ultrasound diagnosis of accreta was 68% andNPV was 98%.Ultrasound had a sensitivity of 89.5%. Compared with previa alone, accreta had an odds ratio (OR) of 89.6 (95% CI, 19.44-412.95) for estimated blood loss >2 L, an OR of 29.6 (95% CI, 8.20-107.00) for transfusion and an OR of 8.52 (95% CI, 2.58-28.11) for length of hospital stay >4 days. Conclusion: Placenta accreta is associated with greater morbidity than is placenta previa alone. Ultrasound examination is a good diagnostic test for accreta in women with placenta previa. This is consistent with most other studies in the literature.

AB - Objective: To examine the diagnostic precision of ultrasound examination for placenta accreta in women with placenta previa and to compare the morbidity associated with accreta to that of previa alone. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of all women with previa with/without accreta examined at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) between 2002 and 2008. The sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV) of ultrasound examination for the diagnosis of accreta were calculated and compared with results from similar studies in the literature. Univariable analysis was used to compare clinical outcomes. Results: The PPV of an ultrasound diagnosis of accreta was 68% andNPV was 98%.Ultrasound had a sensitivity of 89.5%. Compared with previa alone, accreta had an odds ratio (OR) of 89.6 (95% CI, 19.44-412.95) for estimated blood loss >2 L, an OR of 29.6 (95% CI, 8.20-107.00) for transfusion and an OR of 8.52 (95% CI, 2.58-28.11) for length of hospital stay >4 days. Conclusion: Placenta accreta is associated with greater morbidity than is placenta previa alone. Ultrasound examination is a good diagnostic test for accreta in women with placenta previa. This is consistent with most other studies in the literature.

KW - Placenta accreta

KW - Placenta previa

KW - Ultrasound

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79951866754&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79951866754&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/uog.8827

DO - 10.1002/uog.8827

M3 - Article

C2 - 20812377

AN - SCOPUS:79951866754

VL - 37

SP - 324

EP - 327

JO - Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology

JF - Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology

SN - 0960-7692

IS - 3

ER -