Use of routine ureteral stents in cesarean hysterectomy for placenta accreta.

Authors:
Rosanna Esposito
Rosanna Esposito
Federico II University of Naples
DR Gabriele Saccone, MD
DR Gabriele Saccone, MD
School of Medicine, University of Naples Federico II
OB/GYN
Naples | Italy
Laura Sarno
Laura Sarno
University Federico II
Italy
Maddalena Morlando
Maddalena Morlando
University Federico II
Italy
Giuseppe Maria Maruotti
Giuseppe Maria Maruotti
University of Naples Federico II
Italy
Sonia Migliorini
Sonia Migliorini
Sant'Andrea Hospital

J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2019 May 2:1-4. Epub 2019 May 2.

a Department of Neuroscience, Reproductive Sciences and Dentistry, School of Medicine , University of Naples "Federico II" , Naples , Italy.

Objective: To evaluate benefits of use of ureteral stents in association with cesarean hysterectomy in case of placenta accreta.

Methods: This was a single center, cohort study. Clinical records of singleton pregnancies with placenta accreta who underwent cesarean hysterectomy were included in the study. For this study, pregnancies with diagnoses of placenta accreta, increta, or percreta were considered under the umbrella term of placenta accreta. For all women with placenta accreta, delivery was planned via cesarean hysterectomy at 34-35 weeks, without any attempt to remove the placenta. Reasons for earlier delivery included vaginal bleeding and spontaneous onset of labor. The primary outcome was the incidence of unintentional urinary tract injury. Outcomes were compared in a cohort of women who had planned the placement of ureteral stents and in those who did not.

Results: Forty-four singleton gestations with confirmed placenta accreta at the time of cesarean hysterectomy were included in the study. Twenty-four (54.5%) of the included women had the placing of ureteral stents prior to cesarean, while 20 (45.5%) did not. At histological confirmation, most of them had placenta accreta (17/44, 38.6%), 14 placenta increta (31.8%), and 13 placenta percreta (29.6%). Urinary tract injuries occurred in eight cases (18.2%), six in the ureteral stents and two in the non-ureteral stents group (25 versus 10%; pā€‰=ā€‰.21). All the injuries were bladder injuries, while no cases of ureteral injury were recorded. All injuries were recognized intraoperatively.

Conclusion: In case of placenta accreta, the use of ureteral stents in association with cesarean hysterectomy does not reduce the risk of urinary tract injury.

Download full-text PDF

Source
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14767058.2019.1
Publisher Site
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2019.1609935DOI Listing
May 2019
6 Reads

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

placenta accreta
32
cesarean hysterectomy
24
ureteral stents
24
placenta
12
urinary tract
12
stents association
8
association cesarean
8
accreta
8
case placenta
8
included study
8
tract injury
8
hysterectomy included
8
stents
7
cesarean
7
ureteral
6
hysterectomy
6
outcome incidence
4
unintentional urinary
4
incidence unintentional
4
stents group
4

References

(Supplied by CrossRef)

Similar Publications