Cited by 29Pregnancy and preeclampsia studiesMaternal and fetal healthcareNeurological Complications and Syndromes

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 21 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Intra- versus retroplacental hematomas: a retrospective case-control study on pregnancy outcomes

Open access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Intrauterine hematomas are a common pregnancy complication. The literature lacks studies about outcomes based on hematoma localization. Thus, we aimed to compare pregnancies complicated by an intraplacental hematoma to cases with a retroplacental hematoma and to a control group. METHODS: In a retrospective case-control study, 32 women with an intraplacental hematoma, 199 women with a retroplacental hematoma, and a control group consisting of 113 age-matched women with no signs of placental abnormalities were included. Main outcome measures were pregnancy complications. RESULTS: Second-trimester miscarriage was most common in the intraplacental hematoma group (9.4%), followed by women with a retroplacental hematoma (4.2%), and controls (0%; p = 0.007). The intraplacental hematoma group revealed the highest rates for placental insufficiency, intrauterine growth retardation, premature preterm rupture of membranes, preterm labor, preterm delivery <37 weeks, and early preterm delivery <34 weeks (p < 0.05), followed by the retroplacental hematoma group. When tested in multivariate models, intraplacental hematomas were independent predictors for placental insufficiency (ß = 4.19, p < 0.001) and intrauterine growth restriction (ß = 1.44, p = 0.035). Intrauterine fetal deaths occurred only in women with a retroplacental hematoma (p = 0.042). CONCLUSIONS: Intra- and retroplacental hematomas have different risk profiles for the affected pregnancy and act as independent risk factors.

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 · 10.1186/s12884-017-1539-6

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • Decidual bleeding that results in dissection and laceration along the decidual plane may lead to retroplacental, subchorionic, and subamniotic bleeding.

    “Decidual bleeding that results in dissection and laceration along the decidual plane may lead to retroplacental, subchorionic, and subamniotic bleeding (15).”

    From Placental abruption at near-term and term gestations: Pathophysiology, epidemiology, diagnosis, and management (2023) · cites this paper as [15]

    The Background (page unavailable) identifies retroplacental, subchorionic, and subamniotic hematomas as types of placental bleeding. The Discussion (page unavailable) says retroplacental bleeding may extend along the decidua basalis, but does not say that decidual bleeding dissects or lacerates the decidual plane to produce all three types. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Kraus FT, Redline RW, Gersell DJ, Nelson DM, Dicke JM. Placental pathology. Atlas of non-tumor pathology; 2004. p. 117–57.
  2. Schaffer H, Steiner H, Staudach A. Reference values for qualitative and quantitative analysis of uterine, fetoplacental and fetal flow velocity waveforms. J Fertil Reprod. 1998;2:12–3.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Ott, J., Pecnik, P., Promberger, R., Pils, S., Binder, J., & Chalubinski, K. M.
Affiliations
  • Medical University of Vienna (AT)
  • Klinikum Wels-Grieskirchen (AT)
Corresponding author
Promberger, Regina
Venue
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
Published
2017-10-26
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
366-366
ISSN
1471-2393 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2766536327
Cited by
29
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 6 · 2018: 2
FWCI
2.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Pregnancy and preeclampsia studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Maternal and fetal healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Neurological Complications and Syndromes
Keywords
retroplacental hematoma, placental abnormalities, pregnancy complications, second-trimester miscarriage, placental insufficiency, fetal growth restriction, preterm birth, preterm premature rupture of membranes, preterm labor, intrauterine fetal death, hematoma localization
MeSH terms
Abortion, Spontaneous, Adult, Female, Fetal Growth Retardation, Hematoma, Humans, Infant, Newborn, Obstetric Labor, Premature, Placenta, Placenta Diseases, Placental Insufficiency, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Outcome, Pregnancy Trimester, Second, Retrospective Studies, Case-Control Studies, Stillbirth

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