Placenta percreta is associated with more frequent severe maternal morbidity than placenta accreta

BackgroundAbnormally invasive placentation is the leading cause of obstetric hysterectomy and can cause poor to disastrous maternal outcomes. Most previous studies of peripartum management and maternal morbidity have included variable proportions of severe and less severe cases.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to compare maternal morbidity from placenta percreta and accreta.Study DesignThis retrospective study at a referral center in Paris includes all women with abnormally invasive placentation from 2003 through 2017. Placenta percreta and accreta were diagnosed histologically or clinically. When placenta percreta was suspected before birth, a conservative approach leaving the placenta in situ was proposed because of the intraoperative risk of cesarean delivery. When placenta accreta was suspected, parents were offered a choice of a conservative approach or an attempt to remove the placenta, to be followed in case of failure by hysterectomy. Maternal outcomes were compared between women with placenta percreta and those with placenta accreta/increta. The primary outcome measure was a composite criterion of severe acute maternal morbidity including at least 1 of the following: hysterectomy during cesarean delivery, delayed hysterectomy, transfusion of ≥10 U of packed red blood cells, septic shock, acute kidney injury, cardiovascular failure, maternal transfer to intensive care, or death.ResultsOf the 156 women included, 51 had placenta percreta and 105 placenta accreta. Abnormally invasive placentation was suspected antenatally nearly 4 times more frequently in the percreta than the accreta group (96.1% [49/51] vs 25.7% [27/105], P < .01). Among the 76 women with antenatally suspected abnormally invasive placentation (48.7%), the rate of antenatal decisions for conservative management was higher in the percreta than the accreta group (100% [49/49] vs 40.7% [11/27], P < .01). The composite maternal morbidity rate was significantly higher in the percreta than the accreta group (86.3% [44/51] vs 28/105 [26.7%], P < .001). A secondary analysis restricted to women with an abnormally invasive placentation diameter >6 cm showed similar results (86.0% [43/50) vs 48.7% [19/38), P < .01). The rate of hysterectomy during cesareans was significantly higher in the percreta than the accreta group (52.9% [27/51] vs 20.9% [22/105], P < .01) as was the total hysterectomy rate (43/51 [84.3%] vs 23.8% [25/105], P < .01).ConclusionSevere maternal morbidity is much more frequent in women with placenta percreta than with placenta accreta, despite multidisciplinary planning, management in a referral center, and better antenatal suspicion. Abnormally invasive placentation is the leading cause of obstetric hysterectomy and can cause poor to disastrous maternal outcomes. Most previous studies of peripartum management and maternal morbidity have included variable proportions of severe and less severe cases. The aim of this study was to compare maternal morbidity from placenta percreta and accreta. This retrospective study at a referral center in Paris includes all women with abnormally invasive placentation from 2003 through 2017. Placenta percreta and accreta were diagnosed histologically or clinically. When placenta percreta was suspected before birth, a conservative approach leaving the placenta in situ was proposed because of the intraoperative risk of cesarean delivery. When placenta accreta was suspected, parents were offered a choice of a conservative approach or an attempt to remove the placenta, to be followed in case of failure by hysterectomy. Maternal outcomes were compared between women with placenta percreta and those with placenta accreta/increta. The primary outcome measure was a composite criterion of severe acute maternal morbidity including at least 1 of the following: hysterectomy during cesarean delivery, delayed hysterectomy, transfusion of ≥10 U of packed red blood cells, septic shock, acute kidney injury, cardiovascular failure, maternal transfer to intensive care, or death. Of the 156 women included, 51 had placenta percreta and 105 placenta accreta. Abnormally invasive placentation was suspected antenatally nearly 4 times more frequently in the percreta than the accreta group (96.1% [49/51] vs 25.7% [27/105], P < .01). Among the 76 women with antenatally suspected abnormally invasive placentation (48.7%), the rate of antenatal decisions for conservative management was higher in the percreta than the accreta group (100% [49/49] vs 40.7% [11/27], P < .01). The composite maternal morbidity rate was significantly higher in the percreta than the accreta group (86.3% [44/51] vs 28/105 [26.7%], P < .001). A secondary analysis restricted to women with an abnormally invasive placentation diameter >6 cm showed similar results (86.0% [43/50) vs 48.7% [19/38), P < .01). The rate of hysterectomy during cesareans was significantly higher in the percreta than the accreta group (52.9% [27/51] vs 20.9% [22/105], P < .01) as was the total hysterectomy rate (43/51 [84.3%] vs 23.8% [25/105], P < .01). Severe maternal morbidity is much more frequent in women with placenta percreta than with placenta accreta, despite multidisciplinary planning, management in a referral center, and better antenatal suspicion.