CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 357Maternal and fetal healthcareBlood transfusion and managementUterine Myomas and Treatments

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The management and outcomes of placenta accreta, increta, and percreta in the UK: a population‐based descriptive study

Open access
Fitzpatrick, KE, Sellers, S, Spark, P, Kurinczuk, JJ, Brocklehurst, P, Knight, M·2014·BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
DOI 10.1111/1471-0528.12405PMC PMC3906842
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Objective: To describe the management and outcomes of placenta accreta, increta, and percreta in the UK. Design: A population‐based descriptive study using the UK O bstetric S urveillance S ystem (UKOSS). Setting: All 221 UK hospitals with obstetrician‐led maternity units. Population: All women diagnosed with placenta accreta, increta, and percreta in the UK between May 2010 and April 2011. Methods: Prospective case identification through the monthly mailing of UKOSS. Main outcome measures: Median estimated blood loss, transfusion requirements. Results: A cohort of 134 women were identified with placenta accreta, increta, or percreta: 50% (66/133) were suspected to have this condition antenatally. In women with a final diagnosis of placenta increta or percreta, antenatal diagnosis was associated with reduced levels of haemorrhage (median estimated blood loss 2750 versus 6100 ml, P = 0.008) and a reduced need for blood transfusion (59 versus 94%, P = 0.014), possibly because antenatally diagnosed women were more likely to have preventative therapies for haemorrhage (74 versus 52%, P = 0.007), and were less likely to have an attempt made to remove their placenta (59 versus 93%, P < 0.001). Making no attempt to remove any of the placenta, in an attempt to conserve the uterus or prior to hysterectomy, was associated with reduced levels of haemorrhage (median estimated blood loss 1750 versus 3700 ml, P = 0.001) and a reduced need for blood transfusion (57 versus 86%, P < 0.001). Conclusions: Women with placenta accreta, increta, or percreta who have no attempt to remove any of their placenta, with the aim of conserving their uterus, or prior to hysterectomy, have reduced levels of haemorrhage and a reduced need for blood transfusion, supporting the recommendation of this practice.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1471-0528.12405

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Placenta accreta, increta, or percreta cases, according to whether they were suspected of having this condition antenatally, whether an attempt was made to remove any of the placenta around the time of delivery, and whether a hysterectomy was subsequently performed. *Does not add up to total number of cases—data on whether placenta accreta/increta/percreta suspected antenatally missing for one woman. This woman had an attempt to remove her placenta around the time of delivery and did not have a hysterectomy performed.
Figure 1 Placenta accreta, increta, or percreta cases, according to whether they were suspected of having this condition antenatally, whether an attempt was made to remove any of the placenta around the time of delivery, and whether a hysterectomy was subsequently performed. *Does not add up to total number of cases—data on whether placenta accreta/increta/percreta suspected antenatally missing for one woman. This woman had an attempt to remove her placenta around the time of delivery and did not have a hysterectomy performed.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 16 references

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Office for National Statistics, 2011, Birth Summary Tables, England and Wales 2010
  2. General Register Office for Scotland, 2011, Vital Events Reference Tables 2010
  3. Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency, 2011, Registrar General Annual Report 2010
  4. Centre for Maternal and Child Enquiries, 2010, Perinatal Mortality 2008
  5. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, 2011, Green‐top Guideline No. 27: Placenta Praevia, Placenta Praevia Accreta and Vasa Praevia: Diagnosis and Management

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 357

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Fitzpatrick, K., Sellers, S., Spark, P., Kurinczuk, J., Brocklehurst, P., & Knight, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit University of Oxford Oxford UK
  • University College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Fitzpatrick, KE
ORCID
Venue
BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-08-07
Volume
121
Issue
1
Pages
62-71
ISSN
  • 0306-5456 (ISSN-L)
  • 1470-0328
  • 1471-0528
DOI
10.1111/1471-0528.12405
PMC
PMC3906842
OpenAlex
W2024611038
Cited by
357
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 48 · 2020: 39 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 36 · 2017: 32 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 4
FWCI
17.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Funders
National Institute for Health and Care Research (RP-PG-0608-10038)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Maternal and fetal healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hematology › Blood transfusion and management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Uterine Myomas and Treatments
Keywords
placenta accreta, placenta increta, placenta percreta, prenatal diagnosis, uterine preservation, hysterectomy, obstetric hemorrhage, blood transfusion, estimated blood loss, placenta removal, UK Obstetric Surveillance System
MeSH terms
Blood Transfusion, Cesarean Section, Ergonovine, Female, United Kingdom, Postpartum Hemorrhage, Humans, Hysterectomy, Oxytocics, Oxytocin, Placenta Accreta, Pregnancy, Prospective Studies, Dinoprost, Cohort Studies, Misoprostol, Treatment Outcome, Uterine Artery Embolization

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review