4.1 Article

Predictors of High Grade and Other Clinically Significant Placental Findings by Indication for Submission in Singleton Placentas From Term Births

期刊

PEDIATRIC AND DEVELOPMENTAL PATHOLOGY
卷 23, 期 4, 页码 274-284

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/1093526620904801

关键词

placenta; term pregnancy; indications for submission; pathology; Amsterdam classification; adverse outcomes

资金

  1. March of Dimes Prematurity Research Collaborative of Ohio

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Indications for placental submission are variable. Established guidelines are largely based on expert opinion, and there is a need for more evidence-based criteria. A 10-year database of term placentas was used to evaluate indications significantly associated with placental pathology. Lesions in 5 categories were separated into high- and low-grade subgroups. Two additional high-grade lesions were also evaluated. Indications associated with high-grade placental lesions were chronic monitoring abnormalities, severe preeclampsia, pregestational diabetes, maternal signs of infection, postdates pregnancy, artificial reproductive technology, drug abuse, umbilical cord entanglements, selected gross placental abnormalities, stillbirth, Apgar 5 minutes <6, small-for-gestational age infant, and macrosomia. Indications for which placental findings did not differ from the population as a whole were acute monitoring abnormalities, chronic hypertension, maternal obesity, vaginal bleeding, accessory lobe/multilobed placenta, meconium-stained fluid, single umbilical artery, and borderline large-for-gestational age infant. Other indications for submission were intermediate showing significant or borderline elevations in the prevalence of low- and high-grade lesions combined. We suggest on the basis of this study that guidelines for the submission of singleton term placentas could be modified to exclude cases with clinical indications that lack a significant association with placental lesions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据