Retrospective study for outcome of placenta praevia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54361/Abstract
Objective: the aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the outcome of placenta praevia in relation to the number of previous caesarean section. the study is conducted in zawia teaching hospital in the period from January 2014 to December 2015 , the total number of deliveries during this period was7,695 patients in which 77 patient was placenta praevia i.e. around (1%).maternal and neonatal data were obtained from medical records and the hospital data base system. the placenta praevia was managed by multidisciplinary team. methods: Data are collected are on patient age, parity, occupation, residence, presenting symptoms, gestation age at CS, degree of placenta as assessed by USS , history of previous CS or previous uterine surgery, previous history of curettage, associated complications , blood transfusion ,haemoglobin level after surgery, fetal weight and condition at delivery. the diagnosis was made on ultrasound and at surgery results: in total ,77 patient with placenta praevia were identified, placenta accrete found in 5 cases(6.49%),placenta increta in 2 cases(2.59%) and placenta percreta in 3 cases(3.89%). The higher incidence of caesarean section rate delivery today is strongly associated with abnormal placentation due to deficiency in decidua Basalis at the endometrial scar .the risk of morbidity increase with increasing number of caesarean section .in our study PP was found in 6 nulliparous patients ( 7.7% of total cases ), while around 62 patient(80.51% )were multipara and 9 patient were grand multipara (11.68%) ,the highest number recorded in para-4patient. out of 77 cases of PP there were 5 cases with placenta accreta ,1 case increta and 3patient with placenta percreta. The number of patient with previous CS was 42 patient (54.54%)and those with no previous CS was 35 patient (45.45%) with increased incidence among those with previous one CS . caesarean hysterectomy was performed in 13 patients out of 77 patients ,10 patients have previous CS and the placenta was accreta in 5 patient , 1 patient increta, and percreta in 3 patients with highest incidence among previous 3 CS , the remaining cases of hysterectomy was done due to massive haemorrhage occurred intraoperative. conclusion: the placenta praevia with the increasing number of CS is associated highest maternal morbidity as CS hysterectomy and excessive blood loss and the need for blood transfusion. introduction: placenta praevia is identified as a placenta implanted partially or completely in the lower uterine segment, it occurs in 2.8:1000 of pregnancy worldwide ,PP represent significant clinical problems because the associated complication which could be happened as caesarean hysterectomy, premature delivery, and maternal and perinatal mortality the risk factors for placenta praevia includes previous uterine scar, maternal age over 35 years, smoking, infertility treatment, male gender, grandmultiparity, the risk of morbidly adherent placenta increase with each previous CS birth, this markedly increases the risk for massive haemorrhage at the time of attempted placental removal and it is the most common cause of caesarean hysterectomy. Placenta praevia increase dramatically with advancing maternal age ,in our study the highest incidence was in 30-40 years age patient.
Downloads
References
World Health Organization, WHO Recommendations for the Prevention and Treatment of Postpartum Haemorrhage, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2012,
an evidence based text for MRCOG. Edited by DAVID M. LUESLEY, PHILIP N. BSKER.
International journal of women health Maternal and neonatal outcomes of placenta previa and placenta accreta: three years of experience with a two-consultant approach Gamal A Kassem1 and Ali K Alzahrani. McShane P, Heyl P. Maternal and perinatal morbidity resulting from placenta previa. Obstet Gynecol. 1985;65:176–182. [PubMed]
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2018 Nuriya B. Nessr, Mona Murtagee Rahel (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Open Access Policy
Libyan journal of medical Research (LJMR).is an open journal, therefore there are no fees required for downloading any publication from the journal website by authors, readers, and institution.
The journal applies the license of CC BY (a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license). This license allows authors to keep ownership f the copyright of their papers. But this license permits any user to download , print out, extract, reuse, archive, and distribute the article, so long as appropriate credit is given to the authors and the source of the work.
The license ensures that the article will be available as widely as possible and that the article can be included in any scientific archive.
Editorial Policy
The publication of an article in a peer reviewed journal is an essential model for Libyan journal of medical Research (LJMR). It is necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editorial, the peer reviewer and the publisher.
Any manuscript or substantial parts of it, submitted to the journal must not be under consideration by any other journal. In general, the manuscript should not have already been published in any journal or other citable form, although it may have been deposited on a preprint server. Authors are required to ensure that no material submitted as part of a manuscript infringes existing copyrights, or the rights of a third party.
Authorship Policy
The manuscript authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution and intellectual input to the research submitted to the journal, including design, performance, interpretation of the reported study, and writing the manuscript. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors.
Others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the manuscript but without intellectual input should only be recognized in the acknowledgements section of the manuscript. Also, one of the authors should be selected as the corresponding author to communicate with the journal and approve the final version of the manuscript for publication in the LJMR.
Peer-review Policy
- All the manuscripts submitted to LJMR will be subjected to the double-blinded peer-review process;
- The manuscript will be reviewed by two suitable experts in the respective subject area.
- Reports of all the reviewers will be considered while deciding on acceptance/revision or rejection of a manuscript.
- Editor-In-Chief will make the final decision, based on the reviewer’s comments.
- Editor-In-Chief can ask one or more advisory board members for their suggestions upon a manuscript, before making the final decision.
- Associate editor and review editors provide administrative support to maintain the integrity of the peer-review process.
- In case, authors challenge the editor’s negative decision with suitable arguments, the manuscript can be sent to one more reviewer and the final decision will be made based upon his recommendations.
