Timor-Tritsch I E, Monteagudo A, Cali G, Palacios-Jaraquemada J M, Maymon R, Arslan A A, Patil N, Popiolek D, Mittal K R
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, New York University SOM, New York, NY, USA.
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Apr;43(4):383-95. doi: 10.1002/uog.13282.
To determine, by evaluation of histological slides, images and descriptions of early (second-trimester) placenta accreta (EPA) and placental implantation in cases of Cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP), whether these are pathologically indistinguishable and whether they both represent different stages in the disease continuum leading to morbidly adherent placenta in the third trimester.
The database of a previously published review of CSP and EPA was used to identify articles with histopathological descriptions and electronic images for pathological review. When possible, microscopic slides and/or paraffin blocks were obtained from the original researchers. We also included from our own institutions cases of CSP and EPA for which pathology specimens were available. Two pathologists examined all the material independently and, blinded to each other's findings, provided a pathological diagnosis based on microscopic appearance. Interobserver agreement in diagnosis was determined.
Forty articles were identified, which included 31 cases of CSP and 13 cases of EPA containing histopathological descriptions and/or images of the pathology. We additionally included six cases of CSP and eight cases of EPA from our own institutions, giving a total of 58 cases available for histological evaluation (37 CSP and 21 EPA) containing clear definitions of morbidly adherent placenta. In the 29 cases for which images/slides were available for histopathological evaluation, both pathologists attested to the various degrees of myometrial and/or scar tissue invasion by placental villi with scant or no intervening decidua, consistent with the classic definition of morbidly adherent placenta. Based on the reviewed material, cases with a diagnosis of EPA and those with a diagnosis of CSP showed identical histopathological features. Interobserver correlation was high (kappa = 0.93).
EPA and placental implantation in CSP are histopathologically indistinguishable and may represent different stages in the disease continuum leading to morbidly adherent placenta in the third trimester.
通过评估组织学切片、图像以及剖宫产瘢痕妊娠(CSP)病例中早期(孕中期)胎盘植入(EPA)和胎盘着床情况,确定它们在病理上是否难以区分,以及它们是否均代表导致孕晚期胎盘植入异常的疾病连续过程中的不同阶段。
使用先前发表的关于CSP和EPA综述的数据库来识别具有组织病理学描述和电子图像以供病理审查的文章。如有可能,从原始研究人员处获取显微镜载玻片和/或石蜡块。我们还纳入了我们自己机构中可获得病理标本的CSP和EPA病例。两名病理学家独立检查所有材料,并在对彼此的发现不知情的情况下,根据显微镜下的表现做出病理诊断。确定观察者间诊断的一致性。
共识别出40篇文章,其中包括31例CSP和13例EPA,包含组织病理学描述和/或病理图像。我们还从我们自己的机构纳入了6例CSP和8例EPA,共有58例可用于组织学评估(37例CSP和21例EPA),其中对胎盘植入异常有明确的定义。在29例可获得组织病理学评估图像/载玻片的病例中,两位病理学家均证实胎盘绒毛对子宫肌层和/或瘢痕组织有不同程度的浸润,其间蜕膜稀少或无蜕膜,这与胎盘植入异常的经典定义一致。根据审查的材料,诊断为EPA的病例和诊断为CSP的病例显示出相同的组织病理学特征。观察者间的相关性很高(kappa = 0.93)。
EPA和CSP中的胎盘着床在组织病理学上难以区分,可能代表导致孕晚期胎盘植入异常的疾病连续过程中的不同阶段。