Preview

Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproduction

Advanced search

Current state of the placenta accreta spectrum issue: prospects for organ-preserving treatment

https://doi.org/10.17749/2313-7347/ob.gyn.rep.2024.571

Abstract

Introduction. Placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) is the preferred term approved by most international organizations that refers to the range of pathologic adherence of the placenta. PAS is a serious problem with incidence rate of 1/272 in-labor women. Today, peripartal hysterectomy is considered as the generally accepted global practice for PAS management, however, this approach is related to high level of maternal mortality and the impossibility of pregnancy in the future.

Aim: to analyze publications on the available methods for PAS diagnostics and management by highlighting organ-preserving treatment including assessment of relevant risks and benefits compared with other methods as well as prospects for patients.

Materials and Methods. Research papers were searched for in the databases eLibrary, PubMed and Google Scholar released until August 2024. The following search queries were used: "placenta accreta spectrum", "PAS", "PAS and organ-preserving treatment", "PAS and peripartum hysterectomy", "PAS and organ-preserving management". The selection of articles was carried out in accordance with the recommendations of PRISMA initiative that allowed to analyze 75 publications included in the review.

Results. Organ-preserving PAS treatment is a reasonable alternative to peripartal hysterectomy, because it provides better results with lower risk to maternal health. It is worth noting that each of these methods has own unique features. For instance, organpreserving treatment may last longer to achieve a desired result, but at the same time it can reduce a risk of complications and improve a woman's quality of life in the long term. Along with this, peripartal hysterectomy may be more effective in the short term, but it is associated with a higher risk of complications.

Conclusion. A doctor should provide a woman with all the necessary information about the risks and benefits of each method, as well as help a woman make an informed decision based on her individual needs and preferences. Organ-preserving PAS treatment contributing to preserve fertility offers a better quality of life with lower risk to maternal health. Ultimately, a choice between peripartal hysterectomy and organ-preserving treatment depends on a specific situation as well as woman's state of health.

About the Authors

M. D. Voronina
Rostov State Medical University, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation

Maryana D. Voronina

29 Nahichevansky Lane, Rostov-on-Don 344022



D. A. Dolgiev
Rostov State Medical University, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation

Dzhamaleyl A. Dolgiev

29 Nahichevansky Lane, Rostov-on-Don 344022



R. A. Dolgieva
Rostov State Medical University, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation

Raiskhan A. Dolgieva

29 Nahichevansky Lane, Rostov-on-Don 344022



A. S. Mirovaeva
Rostov State Medical University, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation

Anastasiya S. Mirovaeva

29 Nahichevansky Lane, Rostov-on-Don 344022



Z. F. Garaeva
Izhevsk State Medical Academy, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation

Zaliya F. Garaeva

281 Kommunarov Str., Izhevsk 426056



Yu. K. Ivanova
Pavlov First Saint Petersburg State Medical University, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation

Yulia K. Ivanova

6–8 Lev Tolstoy Str., Saint Petersburg 197022



I. V. Sarapultsev
Kirov State Medical University, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation

Ilya V. Sarapultsev

112 Karl Marks Str., Kirov 610027



E. I. Turdieva
Rostov State Medical University, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation

Elizaveta I. Turdieva

29 Nahichevansky Lane, Rostov-on-Don 344022



V. A. Rakov
Mechnikov North-Western State Medical University, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation

Vladimir A. Rakov

41 Kirochnaya Str., Saint Petersburg 191015



V. K. Kuklina
Mechnikov North-Western State Medical University, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation

Veronika K. Kuklina

41 Kirochnaya Str., Saint Petersburg 191015



A. E. Manelov
Mechnikov North-Western State Medical University, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation

Aleksandr E. Manelov

41 Kirochnaya Str., Saint Petersburg 191015



K. Kh. Khalilova
Samara State Medical University, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation

Kifayat Kh. Khalilova

89 Chapaevskaya Str., Samara 443099



References

1. Syundyukova E.G., Chulanova Yu.S., Sashenkov S.L. et al. Placenta previa and placenta accreta: questions of diagnosing and obstetric management. [Predlezhanie i vrastanie placenty: voprosy diagnostiki i akusherskoj taktiki]. Rossijskij vestnik akushera-ginekologa. 2022;22(3):12–20. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17116/rosakush20222203112.

2. Mogos M.F., Salemi J.L., Ashley M. et al. Recent trends in placenta accreta in the United States and its impact on maternal-fetal morbidity and healthcare-associated costs, 1998–2011. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016;29(7):1077–82. https://doi.org/10.3109/14767058.2015.1034103.

3. Baranovskaya E.I. Etiology and diagnosis of placenta accreta. [Etiologiya i diagnostika placenta accrete]. Rossijskij vestnik akusheraginekologa. 2020;20(3):24–8. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17116/rosakush20202003124.

4. Lebedenko E.Yu., Bespalaya A.V., Feoktistova T.E., Rymashevskiy M.A. Analysis of global trends in caesarean section rates using the Robson classification. [Analiz mirovyh trendov urovnya kesareva secheniya s ispol'zovaniem klassifikacii Robsona]. Medicinskij vestnik Yuga Rossii. 2021;12(2):16–21. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.21886/2219-8075-2021-12-2-16-21.

5. Silver R.M., Branch D.W. Placenta accreta spectrum. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(16):1529 36. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMcp1709324.

6. Einerson B.D., Gilner J.B., Zuckerwise L.C. Placenta accreta spectrum. Obstet Gynecol. 2023;142(1):31–50. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000005229.

7. Ernst L.M., Linn R.L., Minturn L., Miller E.S. Placental pathologic associations with morbidly adherent placenta: potential insights into pathogenesis. Pediatr Dev Pathol. 2017;20(5):387–93. https://doi.org/10.1177/1093526617698600.

8. Jauniaux E., Bhide A., Kennedy A. et al.; FIGO Placenta Accreta Diagnosis and Management Expert Consensus Panel. FIGO consensus guidelines on placenta accreta spectrum disorders: Prenatal diagnosis and screening. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2018;140(3):274–80. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12408.

9. Jauniaux E., Ayres-de-Campos D., Langhoff-Roos J. et al. FIGO Placenta Accreta Diagnosis and Management Expert Consensus Panel. FIGO classification for the clinical diagnosis of placenta accreta spectrum disorders. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2019;146(1):20–4. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12761.

10. Yu F.N.Y., Leung K.Y. Antenatal diagnosis of placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) disorders. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2021;72:13–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2020.06.010.

11. Carusi D.A., Fox K.A., Lyell D.J. et al. Placenta accreta spectrum without placenta previa. Obstet Gynecol. 2020;136(3):458–65. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000003970.

12. Sugai S., Yamawaki K., Sekizuka T. et al. Pathologically diagnosed placenta accreta spectrum without placenta previa: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2023;5(8):101027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajogmf.2023.101027.

13. Committee on Obstetric Practice. Committee opinion no. 529: placenta accreta. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;120(1):207–11. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e318262e340.

14. Jauniaux E., Collins S., Burton G.J. Placenta accreta spectrum: pathophysiology and evidence-based anatomy for prenatal ultrasound imaging. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;218(1):75–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2017.05.067.

15. Laoreti A., Thilaganathan B., Agten A.K. et al. Placental thickness in the lower uterine segment and invasive placentation: Will the promise live up? Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2019;98(2):266. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.13460.

16. Familiari A., Liberati M., Lim P. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in detecting the severity of abnormal invasive placenta: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2018;97(5):507–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.13258.

17. Palacios-Jaraquemada J.M., Bruno C.H., Martín E. MRI in the diagnosis and surgical management of abnormal placentation. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2013;92(4):392–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01527.x.

18. D'Antonio F., Palacios-Jaraquemada J., Lim P.S. et al. Counseling in fetal medicine: evidence-based answers to clinical questions on morbidly adherent placenta. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016;47(3):290–301. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.14950.

19. Collins S.L., Alemdar B., van Beekhuizen H.J. et al.; International Society for Abnormally Invasive Placenta (IS-AIP). Evidence-based guidelines for the management of abnormally invasive placenta: recommendations from the International Society for Abnormally Invasive Placenta. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019;220(6):511–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2019.02.054.

20. Allen L., Jauniaux E., Hobson S. et al. FIGO Placenta Accreta Diagnosis and Management Expert Consensus Panel. FIGO consensus guidelines on placenta accreta spectrum disorders: Nonconservative surgical management. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2018;140(3):281–90. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12409.

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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2017.02.050.

22. Fitzpatrick K.E., Sellers S., Spark P. et al. The management and outcomes of placenta accreta, increta, and percreta in the UK: a population-based descriptive study. BJOG. 2014;121(1):62–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.12405.

23. Nieto-Calvache A.J., Palacios-Jaraquemada J.M., Osanan G. et al. Latin American group for the study of placenta accreta spectrum. Lack of experience is a main cause of maternal death in placenta accreta spectrum patients. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2021;100(8):1445–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.14163.

24. Overton E., Wen T., Friedman A.M. et al. Outcomes associated with peripartum hysterectomy in the setting of placenta accreta spectrum disorder. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2023;5(12):101174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajogmf.2023.101174.

25. Bailit J.L., Grobman W.A., Rice M.M. et al.; Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units (MFMU) Network. Morbidly adherent placenta treatments and outcomes. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(3):683–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000000680.

26. Angstmann T., Gard G., Harrington T. et al. Surgical management of placenta accreta: a cohort series and suggested approach. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;202(1):38.e1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2009.08.037.

27. Shamshirsaz A.A., Fox K.A., Salmanian B. et al. Maternal morbidity in patients with morbidly adherent placenta treated with and without a standardized multidisciplinary approach. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;212(2):218.1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2014.08.019.

28. Eller A.G., Porter T.F., Soisson P., Silver R.M. Optimal management strategies for placenta accreta. BJOG. 2009;116(5):648–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2008.02037.x.

29. Warshak C.R., Ramos G.A., Eskander R. et al. Effect of predelivery diagnosis in 99 consecutive cases of placenta accreta. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;115(1):65–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181c4f12a.

30. Sentilhes L., Kayem G., Mattuizzi A. Conservative approach: Intentional retention of the placenta. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2021;72:52–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2020.07.010.

31. Schumann E.A. Pathology of the third stage of labor with especial reference to the placental element. Med Rec Ann. 1940;151:381–4.

32. Sentilhes L., Deneux-Tharaux C., Seco A., Kayem G. 4: Conservative management versus cesarean hysterectomy for placenta accreta spectrum; the PACCRETA prospective population-based study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020;222(1):S3–S4.

33. Sentilhes L., Seco A., Azria E. et al.; PACCRETA Study Group. Conservative management or cesarean hysterectomy for placenta accreta spectrum: the PACCRETA prospective study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022;226(6):839.e1– 839.e24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2021.12.013.

34. Sentilhes L., Seco A., Kayem G., Deneux-Tharaux C. Postdischarge outcomes of readmitted women included in the PACCRETA study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022;227(5):795–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2022.06.042.

35. Amsalem H., Kingdom J.C.P., Farine D. et al. Planned caesarean hysterectomy versus "conserving" caesarean section in patients with placenta accreta. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2011;33(10):1005–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1701-2163(16)35049-6.

36. Kutuk M.S., Ak M., Ozgun M.T. Leaving the placenta in situ versus conservative and radical surgery in the treatment of placenta accreta spectrum disorders. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2018;140(3):338–44. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12308.

37. Bouvier A., Sentilhes L., Thouveny F. et al. Planned caesarean in the interventional radiology cath lab to enable immediate uterine artery embolization for the conservative treatment of placenta accreta. Clin Radiol. 2012;67(11):1089–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2012.04.001.

38. Sentilhes L., Kayem G., Chandraharan E. et al; FIGO Placenta Accreta Diagnosis and Management Expert Consensus Panel. FIGO consensus guidelines on placenta accreta spectrum disorders: Conservative management. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2018;140(3):291–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12410.

39. Soyer P., Sirol M., Fargeaudou Y. et al. Placental vascularity and resorption delay after conservative management of invasive placenta: MR imaging evaluation. Eur Radiol. 2013;23(1):262–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-012-2573-4.

40. Pineles B.L., Coselli J., Ghorayeb T. et al. Leaving the placenta in situ in pla- centa accreta spectrum disorders: a single-center case series. Am J Perinatol. 2024;41(S 01):е420–е429. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1885-1942.

41. Sentilhes L., Ambroselli C., Kayem G. et al. Maternal outcome after conservative treatment of placenta accreta. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;115(3):526–34. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181d066d4.

42. Legendre G., Zoulovits F.J., Kinn J. et al. Conservative management of placenta accreta: hysteroscopic resection of retained tissues. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014;21(5):910–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2014.04.004.

43. Baranouskaya E.I. Prevention of massive bleeding due to placenta accreta. [Predotvrashchenie massivnogo krovotecheniya pri placenta accreta]. Rossijskij vestnik akushera-ginekologa. 2021;21(1):84–7. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17116/rosakush20212101184.

44. Kulikov I.A., Dobrokhotova Yu.E., Artemyeva K.A. et al. Modern view on the treatment of pregnant women with placenta previa and placenta accreta spectrum (review). [Sovremennyj vzglyad na taktiku lecheniya beremennyh s patologicheskim prikrepleniem i predlezhaniem placenty (obzor literatury)]. Problemy reprodukcii. 2023;29(2):42–50. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17116/repro20232902142.

45. Taylor F.B., Toh C.H., Hoots W.K. et al.; Scientific Subcommittee on Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation (DIC) of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH). Towards definition, clinical and laboratory criteria, and a scoring system for disseminated intravascular coagulation. Thromb Haemost. 2001;86(5):1327–30.

46. Asakura H., Takahashi H., Uchiyama T. et al.; DIC subcommittee of the Japanese Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis. Proposal for new diagnostic criteria for DIC from the Japanese Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis. Thromb J. 2016;14:42. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12959-016- 0117-x.

47. Singh N., Sethi A. Endometritis – diagnosis, treatment and its impact on fertility – a scoping review. JBRA Assist Reprod. 2022;26(3):538–46. https://doi.org/10.5935/1518-0557.20220015.

48. Kalinkina O.B., TezikovYu.V., Lipatov I.S. et al. Experience of organpreserving management tactics for placenta accreta. [Opyt organosohranyayushchej taktiki vedeniya pri vrastanii placenty]. Mediko-farmacevticheskij zhurnal "Pul's". 2023;25(6):37–42. (In Russ.). https://doi.org//10.26787/nydha-2686-6838-2023-25-6-37-42.

49. Grover B., Einerson B.D., Keenan K.D. et al. Patient-reported health outcomes and quality of life after peripartum hysterectomy for placenta accreta spectrum. Am J Perinatol. 2022;39(3):281–7. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0040-1715465.

50. Sentilhes L., Kayem G., Silver R.M. Conservative management of placenta accreta spectrum. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2018;61(4):783–94. https://doi.org/10.1097/GRF.0000000000000395.

51. Dahl C.M., Turok D., Heuser C.C. et al. Strategies for obstetricians and gynecologists to advance reproductive autonomy in a post-Roe landscape. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2024;230(2):226–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2023.07.055.

52. Einerson B.D., Watt M.H., Sartori B. et al. Lived experiences of patients with placenta accreta spectrum in Utah: a qualitative study of semistructured interviews. BMJ Open. 2021;11(11):e052766. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052766.

53. Bartels H.C., Horsch A., Cooney N. et al. Living with a diagnosis of Placenta Accreta Spectrum: Mothers' and Fathers' experience of the antenatal journey and the birth. PLoS One. 2023;18(5):e0286082. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286082.

54. Bartels H.C., Horsch A., Cooney N. et al. Living beyond placenta accreta spectrum: parent's experience of the postnatal journey and recommendations for an integrated care pathway. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2022;22(1):397. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-022-04726-8.

55. Shainker S.A., Cornely R.M., Astake R., Hacker M.R. Patient perception of care, outcomes, and consequences from placenta accreta spectrum: a survey-based study. Am J Perinatol. 2024;41(S 01):е486–е493. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1905-5079.

56. Bartels H.C., Lalor J.G., Walsh D. et al. Anesthesia and postpartum pain management for placenta accreta spectrum: the patient perspective and recommendations for care. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2024;164(3):992–1000. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.15125.

57. Abi Habib P., Goetzinger K., Turan O.M. Placenta accreta spectrum conservative management and coagulopathy: case series and systematic review. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2024;63(6):731–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.27547.

58. Marcellin L., Delorme P., Bonnet M.P. et al. Placenta percreta is associated with more frequent severe maternal morbidity than placenta accreta. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;219(2):193.e1–193.e9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2018.04.049.

59. Pather S., Strockyj S., Richards A. et al. Maternal outcome after conservative management of placenta percreta at caesarean section: a report of three cases and a review of the literature. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2014;54(1):84–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.12149.

60. Clausen C., Lönn L., Langhoff-Roos J. Management of placenta percreta: a review of published cases. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2014;93(2):138– 43. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.12295.

61. Youssefzadeh A.C., Matsuzaki S., Mandelbaum R.S. et al. Trends, characteristics, and outcomes of conservative management for placenta percreta. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2022;306(3):913–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-021-06384-1.

62. Sentilhes L., Kayem G., Deneux-Tharaux C. Conservative management or cesarean hysterectomy for placenta percreta? A subgroup analysis of the PACCRETA study is needed. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022;227(1):117–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2022.01.029.

63. Shamshirsaz A.A., Fox K.A., Erfani H. et al. Multidisciplinary team learning in the management of the morbidly adherent placenta: outcome improvements over time. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216(6):612.e1– 612.e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2017.02.016.

64. Erfani H., Fox K.A., Clark S.L. et al. Maternal outcomes in unexpected placenta accreta spectrum disorders: single-center experience with a multidisciplinary team. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019;221(4):337.e1– 337.e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2019.05.035.

65. Fitzgerald G.D., Newton J.M., Atasi L. et al. Pan-American Society for Placenta Accreta Spectrum. Placenta accreta spectrum care infrastructure: an evidence-based review of needed resources supporting placenta accreta spectrum care. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2024;6(1):101229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajogmf.2023.101229.

66. Silver R.M., Fox K.A., Barton J.R. et al. Center of excellence for placenta accreta. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;212(5):561–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2014.11.018.

67. Nawrocki P.S., Levy M., Tang N. et al. Interfacility transport of the pregnant patient: a 5-year retrospective review of a Single Critical Care Transport Program. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2019;23(3):377–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/10903127.2018.1519005.

68. Sentilhes L., Kayem G., Ambroselli C. et al. Fertility and pregnancy outcomes following conservative treatment for placenta accreta. Hum Reprod. 2010;25(11):2803–10. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deq239.

69. Salomon L.J., de Tayrac R., Castaigne-Meary V. et al. Fertility and pregnancy outcome following pelvic arterial embolization for severe postpartum haemorrhage. A cohort study. Hum Reprod. 2003;18(4):849–52. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deg168.

70. Provansal M., Courbiere B., Agostini A. et al. Fertility and obstetric outcome after conservative management of placenta accreta. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2010;109(2):147–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2009.12.011.

71. Zhao H., Liu C., Fu H. et al. Subsequent pregnancy outcomes and risk factors following conservative treatment for placenta accreta spectrum: a retrospective cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2023;5(12):101189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajogmf.2023.101189.

72. Kabiri D., Hants Y., Shanwetter N. et al. Outcomes of subsequent pregnancies after conservative treatment for placenta accreta. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2014;127(2):206–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2014.05.013.

73. Baldwin H.J., Nippita T.A., Torvaldsen S. et al. Outcomes of subsequent births after placenta accreta spectrum. Obstet Gynecol. 2020;136(4):745– 55. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000004051.

74. Roeca C., Little S.E., Carusi D.A. Pathologically diagnosed placenta accreta and hemorrhagic morbidity in a subsequent pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;129(2):321–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000001843.

75. Javinani A., Qaderi S., Hessami K. et al. Delivery outcomes in the subsequent pregnancy following the conservative management of placenta accreta spectrum disorder: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2024;230(5):485–492.e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2023.10.047.


What is already known about this subject?

► Currently, the main therapeutic approach for placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) is peripartal hysterectomy characterized by a high rate of postoperative complications and inability to plan pregnancy.

► Obstetricians and gynecologists have been increasingly turning to alternative uterus-preserving PAS interventions, which also reduce a risk of complications, providing women with possibility of pregnancy in the future.

► Uterus-preserving methods of PAS treatment are presented as uterus resection-reconstruction and delayed interval hysterectomy.

What are the new findings?

► Organ-preserving treatment requires longer timeframe, but lowers a risk of complications and improves a woman's quality of life in the future. Peripartal hysterectomy is effective in the short term, but is related to a higher risk of complications.

► Organ-preserving PAS treatment allows to avoid serious surgery and preserve a possibility of pregnancy in the future, however, prolonged postpartum monitoring can be painful and inconvenient. It is important that a pregnant woman participates in decision-making, even if a single strategy is preferred for medical or logistics reasons.

► Fertility rate in PAS individuals is unchanged after organ-preserving treatment. Study data show that 83–89 % PAS patients with mean 17.3 months post-treatment were able to become pregnant. All pregnancies preserved after the first trimester of pregnancy ended with the birth of a healthy child.

How might it impact on clinical practice in the foreseeable future?

► Organ-preserving PAS treatment allows to preserve female fertility, which is extremely important in the current demographic situation.

► Organ-preserving treatment may require longer timeframe to achieve a desired result, but it can lower a risk of complications and improve a woman's quality of life in the long term. Along with this, peripartal hysterectomy may be more effective in the short term, but it is related to a higher risk of complications.

► A possibility of preserving uterus with placenta in situ and subsequent organ-preserving management allows for an individual treatment approach, taking into account the desires and needs of each patient.

Review

For citations:


Voronina M.D., Dolgiev D.A., Dolgieva R.A., Mirovaeva A.S., Garaeva Z.F., Ivanova Yu.K., Sarapultsev I.V., Turdieva E.I., Rakov V.A., Kuklina V.K., Manelov A.E., Khalilova K.Kh. Current state of the placenta accreta spectrum issue: prospects for organ-preserving treatment. Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproduction. 2025;19(1):82-96. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17749/2313-7347/ob.gyn.rep.2024.571

Views: 846


ISSN 2313-7347 (Print)
ISSN 2500-3194 (Online)