We have located links that may give you full text access.
Manual removal of placenta in women having unpredictable adherent placenta.
Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research 2019 January
AIM: Our aim is to provide expected outcomes for undergoing manual removal of placenta (MROP) following vaginal delivery in women having an unpredictable adherent placenta (AP).
METHODS: The data were obtained from four hospitals in Miyazaki Prefecture, Japan. We used propensity score-matched (1:1) analysis to match women who underwent MROP with women who did not undergo MROP (control). Total blood loss and hemorrhagic rate used as a ratio of women who reached a certain amount of blood loss were compared. Subgroup analysis was undertaken and was dependent on the presence of AP. We found the cut-off value of blood loss for detecting AP.
RESULTS: Thirty-seven MROP cases were identified. Total blood loss and hemorrhagic rate differed significantly between MROP cases and controls; 95% of controls had blood loss of 1000 mL or less, whereas for the MROP cases, it was 14%. Fourteen MROP cases were diagnosed with AP. The hemorrhagic rate differed significantly between MROP cases with and without AP (n = 19); 79% of MROP cases without AP had blood loss of 2000 mL or less, whereas for the MROP cases with AP, it was 7%. There were seven incidents of hysterectomy and two of arterial embolization in MROP cases with AP. Through receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, 2035 mL of blood loss was determined to be the optimal cut-off value for detecting AP.
CONCLUSION: The incidence of unpredictable AP in MROP cases was as high as 38%. The morbidity of MROP cases with unpredictable AP was severe. MROP should be prohibited in the absence of appropriate hemostatic preparations.
METHODS: The data were obtained from four hospitals in Miyazaki Prefecture, Japan. We used propensity score-matched (1:1) analysis to match women who underwent MROP with women who did not undergo MROP (control). Total blood loss and hemorrhagic rate used as a ratio of women who reached a certain amount of blood loss were compared. Subgroup analysis was undertaken and was dependent on the presence of AP. We found the cut-off value of blood loss for detecting AP.
RESULTS: Thirty-seven MROP cases were identified. Total blood loss and hemorrhagic rate differed significantly between MROP cases and controls; 95% of controls had blood loss of 1000 mL or less, whereas for the MROP cases, it was 14%. Fourteen MROP cases were diagnosed with AP. The hemorrhagic rate differed significantly between MROP cases with and without AP (n = 19); 79% of MROP cases without AP had blood loss of 2000 mL or less, whereas for the MROP cases with AP, it was 7%. There were seven incidents of hysterectomy and two of arterial embolization in MROP cases with AP. Through receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, 2035 mL of blood loss was determined to be the optimal cut-off value for detecting AP.
CONCLUSION: The incidence of unpredictable AP in MROP cases was as high as 38%. The morbidity of MROP cases with unpredictable AP was severe. MROP should be prohibited in the absence of appropriate hemostatic preparations.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app