Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33407322›Full record

ArticleBMC surgery2021

Placenta previa with posterior extrauterine adhesion: clinical features and management practice.

Yoshikazu Nagase, Shinya Matsuzaki, Masayuki Endo, Takeya Hara, Aiko Okada, Kazuya Mimura, Kosuke Hiramatsu, Aiko Kakigano, Erika Nakatsuka, Tatsuya Miyake and 4 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05645848 (The Rate and Predictors of Vaginal Bleeding Among Women With Placenta Previa), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT05645848 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

The Rate and Predictors of Vaginal Bleeding Among Women With Placenta Previa: A Cross-sectional Study

TypeobservationalSponsorAssiut UniversityRan2022 to 2025Enrolled250ConditionsPlacenta Previa, Vaginal Bleeding, Antepartum HemorrhageArmsUltrasonography
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Yoshikazu NagaseDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan.
Shinya MatsuzakiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan. zacky@gyne.med.osaka-u.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5725-9994
Masayuki EndoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan.
Takeya HaraDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan.
Aiko OkadaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Aizenbashi Hospital, Osaka, Japan.
Kazuya MimuraDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan.
Kosuke HiramatsuDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan.
Aiko KakiganoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan.
Erika NakatsukaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan.
Tatsuya MiyakeDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan.
Tsuyoshi TakiuchiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan.
Yutaka UedaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan.
Takuji TomimatsuDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan.
Tadashi KimuraDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan.
The University of Osaka · JPNational Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center · JPOsaka Health Science University · JPToujinkai Hospital · JPUniversity of Southern California · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA diagnostic sign on magnetic resonance imaging, suggestive of posterior extrauterine adhesion (PEUA), was identified in patients with placenta previa. However, the clinical features or surgical outcomes of patients with placenta previa and PEUA are unclear. Our study aimed to investigate the clinical characteristics of placenta previa with PEUA and determine whether an altered management strategy improved surgical outcomes.

methodsThis single institution retrospective study examined patients with placenta previa who underwent cesarean delivery between 2014 and 2019. In June 2017, we recognized that PEUA was associated with increased intraoperative bleeding; thus, we altered the management of patients with placenta previa and PEUA. To assess the relationship between changes in practice and surgical outcomes, a quasi-experimental method was used to examine the difference-in-difference before (pre group) and after (post group) the changes. Surgical management was modified as follows: (i) minimization of uterine exteriorization and adhesion detachment during cesarean delivery and (ii) use of Nelaton catheters for guiding cervical passage during Bakri balloon insertion. To account for patient characteristics, propensity score matching and multivariate regression analyses were performed.

resultsThe study cohort (n = 141) comprised of 24 patients with placenta previa and PEUA (PEUA group) and 117 non-PEUA patients (control group). The PEUA patients were further categorized into the pre (n = 12) and post groups (n = 12) based on the changes in surgical management. Total placenta previa and posterior placentas were more likely in the PEUA group than in the control group (66.7% versus 42.7% [P = 0.04] and 95.8% versus 63.2% [P < 0.01], respectively). After propensity score matching (n = 72), intraoperative blood loss was significantly higher in the PEUA group (n = 24) than in the control group (n = 48) (1515 mL versus 870 mL, P < 0.01). Multivariate regression analysis revealed that PEUA was a significant risk factor for intraoperative bleeding before changes were implemented in practice (t = 2.46, P = 0.02). Intraoperative blood loss in the post group was successfully reduced, as opposed to in the pre group (1180 mL versus 1827 mL, P = 0.04).

conclusionsPEUA was associated with total placenta previa, posterior placenta, and increased intraoperative bleeding in patients with placenta previa. Our altered management could reduce the intraoperative blood loss.

Indexed as

Placenta PreviaAdultBlood Loss, SurgicalCesarean SectionFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornMiddle AgedPostpartum HemorrhagePregnancyPremature BirthRetrospective StudiesAdhesionBakri balloonEndometriosisMagnetic resonance imagingPlacenta previa

Identifiers

PMID33407322
PMCPMC7789541
OpenAlexW3119267863

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.