Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Diagnosis and Management of Placenta Previa

Diagnosis and Management of Placenta Previa

Ratings: (0)|Views: 136|Likes:
Published by mtorquato_1

More info:

Published by: mtorquato_1 on Feb 24, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Diagnosis and Management of PlacentaPrevia
To review the use of transvaginal ultrasound for thediagnosis of placenta previa and recommend management basedon accurate placental localization.
Transvaginal sonography (TVS) versus transabdominalsonography for the diagnosis of placenta previa; route of delivery,based on placenta edge to internal cervical os distance; in-patientversus out-patient antenatal care; cerclage to prevent bleeding;regional versus general anaesthesia; prenatal diagnosis of placenta accreta.
Proven clinical benefit in the use of TVS for diagnosingand planning management of placenta previa.
MEDLINE search for “placenta previa” and bibliographicreview.
Benefits, Harms, and Costs:
Accurate diagnosis of placenta previamay reduce hospital stays and unnecessary interventions.
1. Transvaginal sonography, if available, may be used to investigateplacental location at any time in pregnancy when the placenta isthought to be low-lying. It is significantly more accurate thantransabdominal sonography, and its safety is wellestablished. (11–2A)2. Sonographers are encouraged to report the actual distance fromthe placental edge to the internal cervical os at TVS, usingstandard terminology of millimetres away from the os or millimetresof overlap. A placental edge exactly reaching the internal os isdescribed as 0 mm. When the placental edge reaches or overlapsthe internal os on TVS between 18 and 24 weeks’ gestation(incidence 2–4%), a follow-up examination for placental location inthe third trimester is recommended. Overlap of more than 15 mm isassociatedwithanincreasedlikelihoodofplacentapreviaatterm.(ll-2A)3. When the placental edge lies between 20 mm away from theinternal os and 20 mm of overlap after 26 weeks’ gestation,ultrasound should be repeated at regular intervals depending onthe gestational age, distance from the internal os, and clinicalfeatures such as bleeding, because continued change in placentallocation is likely. Overlap of 20 mm or more at any time in the thirdtrimester is highly predictive of the need for Caesarean section(CS). (llI-B)4. The os–placental edge distance on TVS after 35 weeks’ gestationis valuable in planning route of delivery. When the placental edgelies > 20 mm away from the internal cervical os, women can beoffered a trial of labour with a high expectation of success. Adistance of 20 to 0 mm away from the os is associated with ahigher CS rate, although vaginal delivery is still possible dependingon the clinical circumstances. (ll-2A)5. In general, any degree of overlap (> 0 mm) after 35 weeks is anindication for Caesarean section as the route of delivery. (ll-2A)6. Outpatient management of placenta previa may be appropriatefor stable women with home support, close proximity to ahospital, and readily available transportation and telephonecommunication. (ll-2C)7. There is insufficient evidence to recommend the practice of cervicalcerclage to reduce bleeding in placenta previa. (llI-D)8. Regional anaesthesia may be employed for CS in the presence of placenta previa. (II-2B)9. Women with a placenta previa and a prior CS are at high risk for placenta accreta. If there is imaging evidence of pathologicaladherence of the placenta, delivery should be planned in anappropriate setting with adequate resources. (II-2B)
Comparison with Placenta previa and placenta previaaccreta: diagnosis and management. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Guideline No. 27,October 2005.The level of evidence and quality of recommendations are describedusing the criteria and classifications of the Canadian Task Force onPreventive Health Care (Table).J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2007;29(3):261–266
MARS 2007
This guideline has been reviewed by the Clinical ObstetricsCommittee and approved by the Executive and Council of theSociety of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada.
Lawrence Oppenheimer, MD, FRCSC, Ottawa ON
Dr Anthony Armson, MD, Halifax NSDr Dan Farine (Chair), MD, Toronto ONMs Lisa Keenan-Lindsay, RN, Oakville ONDr Valerie Morin, MD, Cap-Rouge QCDr Tracy Pressey, MD, Vancouver BCDr Marie-France Delisle, MD, Vancouver BCDr Robert Gagnon, MD, London ONDr William Robert Mundle, MD, Windsor ONDr John Van Aerde, MD, Edmonton AB
Key Words:
Placenta previa, Caesarean section, transvaginalultrasonography, low-lying placenta
This guideline reflects emerging clinical and scientific advances as of the date issued and is subject to change. The informationshould not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of treatment or procedure to be followed. Local institutions can dictateamendments to these opinions. They should be well documented if modified at the local level. None of these contents may bereproduced in any form without prior written permission of the SOGC
No. 189, March 2007
lacenta previa is defined as a placenta implanted in thelower segment of the uterus, presenting ahead of theleading pole of the fetus. It occurs in 2.8/1000 singletonpregnanciesand 3.9/1000 twin pregnancies
and representsa significant clinical problem, because the patient may needto be admitted to hospital for observation, she may needblood transfusion, and she is at risk for premature delivery.The incidence of hysterectomyafter Caesarean section (CS)for placenta previa is 5.3% (relative risk compared withthose undergoing CS without placenta previa is 33).
Perinatal mortality rates are three to four times higher thanin normal pregnancies.
The traditional classification of placenta previa describesthe degree to which the placenta encroaches upon the cer-vix in labour and is divided into low-lying, marginal, partial,or complete placenta previa.
In recent years, publicationshave described the diagnosis and outcome of placentaprevia on the basis of localization, using transvaginalsonography (TVS) when the exact relationship of the pla-centaledge totheinternalcervicalos canbe accuratelymea-sured. The increased prognostic value of TVS diagnosis hasrendered the imprecise terminologyof the traditionalclassi-ficationobsolete.
Thisguideline describes thecurrentdiag-nosis and management of placenta previa and is basedlargely on studies using TVS.
Transvaginal sonography is now well established as the pre-ferred method for the accurate localization of a low-lying placenta. Sixty percent of women who undergotransabdominal sonography (TAS) may have a reclassifica-tion of placental position when they undergo TVS.
WithTAS, there is poor visualization of the posterior placenta,
the fetal head can interfere with the visualization of thelower segment,
and obesity 
and underfilling or overfill-ing of the bladder
also interfere with accuracy.For thesereasons, TAS is associated with a false positive rate for thediagnosis of placenta previa of up to 25%.
Accuracy ratesfor TVS are high (sensitivity 87.5%, specificity 98.8%, posi-tive predictive value 93.3%, negative predictive value97.6%), establishing TVS as the gold standard for the diag-nosis of placentaprevia.
The only randomized trial to datecomparing TVS and TAS confirmed that TVS is more ben-eficial.
TVS hasalso beenshowntobesafein thepresenceof placenta previa,
even when there is established vagi-nal bleeding. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) will alsoaccurately image the placenta and is superior to TAS.
It isunlikely that it confers any benefit over TVS for placentallocalization, but this has not been properly evaluated.Furthermore, MRI is not readily available in most units.
1. Transvaginal sonography, if available, may be used toinvestigate placental location at any time in pregnancy when the placenta is thought to be low-lying. It is
MARS 2007
Key to evidence statements and grading of recommendations, using the ranking of the Canadian Task Forceon Preventive Health Care
Quality of Evidence Assessment* Classification of RecommendationsI: Evidence obtained from at least one properly randomizedcontrolled trialII-1: Evidence from well-designed controlled trials withoutrandomizationII-2: Evidence from well-designed cohort (prospective or retrospective) or case-control studies, preferably from morethan one centre or research groupII-3: Evidence obtained from comparisons between times or places with or without the intervention. Dramatic results inuncontrolled experiments (such as the results of treatmentwith penicillin in the 1940s) could also be included in thiscategoryIII: Opinions of respected authorities, based on clinicalexperience, descriptive studies, or reports of expertcommitteesA. There is good evidence to recommend the clinical preventiveactionB. There is fair evidence to recommend the clinical preventiveactionC. The existing evidence is conflicting and does not allow tomake a recommendation for or against use of the clinicalpreventive action; however, other factors may influencedecision-makingD. There is fair evidence to recommend against the clinicalpreventive actionE. There is good evidence to recommend against the clinicalpreventive actionI. There is insufficient evidence (in quantity or quality) to makea recommendation; however, other factors may influencedecision-making
The quality of evidence reported in these guidelines has been adapted from the Evaluation of Evidence criteria described in the Canadian Task Forceon the Periodic Preventive Health Exam Care.
†Recommendations included in these guidelines have been adapted from the Classification of Recommendations criteria described in the CanadianTask Force on the Periodic Preventive Health Exam Care.
significantly more accurate than transabdominalsonography, and its safety is well established. (ll-2A)
The occurrence of placenta previa is common in the firsthalfofpregnancy,anditspersistencetotermwilldependonthe gestational age and the definition employed for theexact relationship of the internal cervical os to the placentaledge on TVS.
In this guideline, the following terminol-ogy is recommended to describe this relationship: when theplacenta edge does not reach the internal os, the distance isreported in millimetres away from the internal os; when theplacental edge overlaps the internal os by any amount, thedistance is described as millimetres of overlap. A placentaledge that exactly reaches the internal os is described by ameasurement of 0 mm.For a placentaledge reachingor overlappingtheinternalos,Mustafaetal.
foundinalongitudinalstudyanincidenceof 42% between 11 and 14 weeks, 3.9% between 20 and 24weeks, and 1.9% at term. With overlap of 23 mm between11 and 14 weeks, they estimated that the probability of pla-centa previa at term was 8%. Similarly, Hill et al.
reportedan incidence of 6.2% for a placenta extending over theinternal os between 9 and 13 weeks. In their series of 1252patients, 20 (1.6%) had overlap of the placental edge of 16 mm or more, and only 4 of these had placenta previapersisting to term (0.3%). Two additional studies that haveexamined various distances of overlap between 9 and16 weeks
agreed that persistence of placenta previa isextremely unlikely if the degree of placental overlap is nomore than 10 mm. Two studies examined cut-off values at18 to 23 weeks’ gestation.
These found a similar inci-dence of the placenta reaching or overlapping the internalos of up to 2%, and overall less than 20% of these persistedas placenta previa. The likelihood of persistent placentaprevia was effectively zero when the placental edge reachedbutdidnotoverlaptheos(0mm)andincreasedsignificantly beyond 15 mm overlap such that a distance of > 25 mmoverlap had a likelihood of placenta previa at delivery of between 40% and 100%.The process of placental “migration” or relative upwardshift of the placenta due to differential growth of the lowersegment is continuous into the late third trimester.
Of 26 patients scanned at an average of 29 weeks’ gestationalage when the placenta lay between 20 mm away from theinternal os and 20 mm of overlap, only 3 (11.5%) requiredCSforplacentapreviaatdelivery.Anaveragemigrationrateof > 1 mm per week was highly predictive of a normal out-come. An overlap of > 20 mm after 26 weeks was predic-tiveoftheneedforCS.
havesubsequently published similar results.Transperineal or translabial ultrasound (using atransabdominal probe) can also improve upon the diagnos-tic accuracy of TAS and may be a useful alternative whenTVS is not available.
2. Sonographers are encouraged to report the actual dis-tancefromtheplacentaledgetotheinternalcervicalosatTVS, using standard terminology of millimetres away from the os or millimetres of overlap. A placental edgeexactly reaching the internal os is described as 0 mm.When the placental edge reaches or overlaps the internalcervical os on TVS between 18 and 24 weeks’ gestation(incidence 2–4%), a follow-up examination for placentallocation in the third trimester is recommended. Overlapof more than 15 mm is associated with an increasedlikelihood of plaenta previa at term. (ll-2A)3. When the placental edge lies between 20 mm away fromthe internal os and 20 mm overlap after 26 weeks’ gesta-tion, ultrasound should be repeated at regular intervalsdepending on the gestational age, distance from theinternal os, and clinical features such as bleeding,because continued change in placental location is likely.Overlap of 20 mm or more at any time in the third tri-mester is highly predictive of the need for CS. (lll-B)
TheneedforCSattermispredicatedupontheostoplacen-tal edge distance and clinical features (e.g., presence of unstable lie and/or bleeding). Five studies have examinedthe likelihood of CS for placenta previa on the basis of dis-tance to the placental edge on the last ultrasound prior todelivery.
The last scan was performed at a mean of 35to 36 weeks’ gestational age, and a distance of > 20 mmaway from the os was associated with a high likelihood of vaginal delivery (range 63–100%). It has been suggestedthat this cut-off distance of > 20 mm away from the osshould be defined as a low-lying placenta, rather than a pla-centa previa, in order to avoid the bias of physicians per-forming elective section based on the report of a placentaprevia.
These cases can be managed in the highexpectation of a vaginal delivery.Between 20 mm and 0 mm away from the os on the lastscan,CS forplacentapreviavariesfromapproximately40%to 90% and may be driven by the exact distance from the osand physicians’ prior knowledge of the ultrasound find-ing.
In this latter group, trial of labour may be appro-priate in the absence of an unstable lie or bleeding,
although more data in the form of prospective studies arerequired on the likelihood of antepartum and intrapartumbleeding.
Diagnosis and Management of Placenta Previa
MARS 2007

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->