Placenta Previa in the Second Trimester: Sonographic and Clinical Factors Associated with Its Resolution

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

ABSTRACT

We identify characteristics that predict resolution of placenta previa and develop a clinical model for likelihood of resolution. We conducted a retrospective study of 366 singleton pregnancies complicated by placenta previa diagnosed with resolution of the previa as the primary outcome. Regression analyses were performed to determine variables associated with resolution and optimal timing for repeat sonographic evaluation. A likelihood of resolution model was created using a parametric survival model with Weibull hazard function. Of the 366 cases, 84% of complete placentae previae and 98% of marginal placentae previae resolved at a mean gestational age of 28.6 ± 5.3 weeks. Only gestational age and distance from the internal cervical os at the time of diagnosis were significantly associated with resolution (p < 0.01). Likelihood of resolution was not significantly associated with any other variables. Marginal previae diagnosed in the second trimester do not appear to warrant repeat ultrasound evaluation for resolution.

REFERENCES

• 1 Rosati P, Guariglia L. Clinical significance of placenta previa detected at early routine transvaginal scan.  J Ultrasound Med. 2000;  19 581-585
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Zelop C C, Bromley B, Frigoletto Jr F D, Benacerraf B R. Second trimester sonographically diagnosed placenta previa: prediction of persistent previa at birth.  Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1994;  44 207-210
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Rizos N, Doran T A, Miskin M, Benzie R J, Ford J A. Natural history of placenta previa ascertained by diagnostic ultrasound.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1979;  133 287-291
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Lauria M R, Smith R S, Treadwell M C et al.. The use of second-trimester transvaginal sonography to predict placenta previa.  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1996;  8 337-340
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Miller D A, Chollet J A, Goodwin T M. Clinical risk factors for placenta previa-placenta accreta.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997;  177 210-214
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Zhang J, Savitz D A. Maternal age and placenta previa: a population-based, case-control study.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1993;  168 641-645
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Ghourab S, Al-Jabari A. Placental migration and mode of delivery in placenta previa: transvaginal sonographic assessment during the third trimester.  Ann Saudi Med. 2000;  20 382-385
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Dashe J S, McIntire D D, Ramus R M, Santos-Ramos R, Twickler D M. Persistence of placenta previa according to gestational age at ultrasound detection.  Obstet Gynecol. 2002;  99 (5 Pt 1) 692-697
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Laughon S K, Wolfe H M, Visco A G. Prior cesarean and the risk for placenta previa on second-trimester ultrasonography.  Obstet Gynecol. 2005;  105 (5 Pt 1) 962-965
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Cho J Y, Lee Y H, Moon M H, Lee J H. Difference in migration of placenta according to the location and type of placenta previa.  J Clin Ultrasound. 2008;  36 79-84
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Ananth C V, Demissie K, Smulian J C, Vintzileos A M. Placenta previa in singleton and twin births in the United States, 1989 through 1998: a comparison of risk factor profiles and associated conditions.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003;  188 275-281
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Cox C, Chu H, Schneider M F, Muñoz A. Parametric survival analysis and taxonomy of hazard functions for the generalized gamma distribution.  Stat Med. 2007;  26 4352-4374
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Kacey EichelbergerM.D. 

Division of Maternal–Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7516

Email: keichelb@med.unc.edu