Outcome of placenta previa: inpatient versus outpatient management
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12809/hkjgom.20.1.01Keywords:
Outpatients, Placenta previa, Pregnancy outcomeAbstract
Objective: To share our 10-year experience on outpatient care of patients with placenta previa with no antepartum haemorrhage (APH) prior to 34 weeks of pregnancy.
Methods: This was a retrospective observational study conducted at a regional obstetric unit in Hong Kong over a 10-year period. Patients with placenta previa with no vaginal bleeding before 34 weeks were included. Those with multiple pregnancy, preeclampsia, serious underlying medical disorders, morbidly adherent placenta, or vaginal delivery were excluded. Data analysed included maternal characteristics, delivery information, maternal morbidities (massive haemorrhage, intensive care unit admission, hysterectomy), and neonatal outcomes (delivery gestation, birth weight, Apgar scores, neonatal intensive care unit admission, perinatal mortality).
Results: A total of 419 women with minor (n=265) or major (n=154) placenta previa were evaluated. Of these cases, 149 (56%) cases of minor and 37 (24%) cases of major placenta previa (p<0.001) were managed as outpatients. For patients with major placenta previa, APH (62.2% vs 35%, p=0.004) and emergency Caesarean deliveries (70.3% vs 23.9%, p<0.001) were more common among outpatients than inpatients although APH >200 mL remained rare. Neonatal outcomes were similar between outpatients and inpatients except that patients with major placenta previa had more preterm deliveries in outpatients than inpatients (29.7% vs 10.3%, p=0.004). The maternal morbidity rate was higher in patients with major placenta previa than with minor placenta previa (31.8% vs 12.5%, p<0.001) but was similar between outpatients and inpatients.
Conclusion: Outpatient care of patients with placenta previa with no vaginal bleeding prior to 34 weeks of pregnancy was associated with more emergency deliveries, but there was no major adverse effect on maternal and neonatal outcomes.
References
Iyasu S, Saftlas AK, Rowley DL, Koonin LM, Lawson HW, Atrash HK. The epidemiology of placenta praevia in the United States, 1979 through 1987. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993;168:1424-9.
Cresswell JA, Ronsmans C, Calvert C, Filippi V. Prevalence of placenta praevia by world region: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Trop Med Int Health 2013;18:712-24.
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists guideline. Placenta praevia: diagnosis and management. January 2001.
Wing DA, Paul RM, Millar LK. Management of the symptomatic placenta previa: a randomized, controlled trial of inpatient versus outpatient expectant management. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;175:806-12.
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists guideline. Placenta praevia, placenta praevia accreta and vasa praevia: diagnosis and management. January 2011.
Betrán AP, Ye J, Moller AB, Zhang J, Gülmezoglu AM, Torloni MR. The increasing trend in caesarean section rates: global, regional and national estimates: 1990-2014. PLoS One 2016;11:e0148343.
Love CD, Fernando KJ, Sargent L, Hughes RG. Major placenta previa should not preclude out-patient management. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2004;117:24-9.
Lam CM, Wong SF, Chow KM, Ho LC. Women with placenta praevia and antepartum haemorrhage have a worse outcome than those who do not bleed before delivery. J Obstet Gynaecol 2000;20:27-31.
Jauniaux E, Alfirevic Z, Bhide AG, et al. Placenta praevia and placenta accreta: diagnosis and management. green-top guideline No. 27a. BJOG 2019;126:e1-e48.
Neilson JP. Interventions for suspected placenta previa. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003;2:CD001998.
Mouer JR. Placenta previa: antepartum conservative management, inpatient versus outpatient. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994;170:1683-6.
Droste S, Keil K. Expectant management of placenta previa: cost-benefit analysis of outpatient management. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994;170:1254-7.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Hong Kong Journal of Gynaecology, Obstetrics and Midwifery
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The Journal has a fully Open Access policy and publishes all articles under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) licence. For any use other than that permitted by this license, written permission must be obtained from the Journal.