RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Modified one-step conservative surgery for placenta accreta spectrum versus caesarean hysterectomy: The CMNT PAS prospective comparative Non-Randomized pilot study
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2024.04.14.24305051
DO 10.1101/2024.04.14.24305051
A1 Abouda, Hassine S
A1 Aloui, Haithem
A1 Marzouk, Sofiene B
A1 Frikha, Hatem
A1 Hammami, Rami
A1 Hentati, Rachid
A1 Chennoufi, Badis
A1 Maghrebi, Hayen
YR 2024
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/04/15/2024.04.14.24305051.abstract
AB Introduction The surgical procedure known as one-step conservative surgery for placenta accreta spectrum involves the excision of the placenta and its attachment site on the myometrium. We aimed to conduct a non-randomized comparative study between conservative surgical treatment of placenta accreta spectrum and classical caesarean hysterectomy, under the name of the “CMNT PAS” study. To determine the sample size and the expected difference between the two groups, we conduct this pilot study.Study design It was a monocentric prospective observational study from January 4, 2020, to August 17, 2022. Patients were allocated into two groups: Group Conservative Surgery (CSG) in which the method detailed in prior research by Palacios-Jaraquemada was slightly modified by our team, control group (CG) when the caesarean hysterectomy was performed.Results Our main goal is to determine the sample size for our principal study and provide adequate data for any other team wishing to study the conservative surgical treatment of placenta accreta spectrum. So, the sample size for a power of 90% and an alpha risk of 5%, the size of each group must be 22 patients. Regarding primary outcomes: estimated blood loss volume was lower in CG compared to CSG but not statistically significant.Conclusion Our pilot study found that the caesarean hysterectomy is similar to conservative surgical treatment for placenta accreta in estimated blood loss. However, the latter helps preserve uterus and possibly fertility.Why was this study conducted?Conducting a pilot study to determine the expected difference in estimated blood loss between conservative surgical treatment and caesarean hysterectomy in placenta accreta, as well as to ascertain the sample size required for a definitive study.What are the key findings?Regarding primary outcomes: estimated blood loss volume was lower in CG compared to CSG but not statistically significant. Our main goal is to determine the sample size for our principal study and provide adequate data for any other team wishing to study the conservative surgical treatment of placenta accreta. So, for our original study, the sample size for a power of 90% and an alpha risk of 5%, the size of each group must be 22 patients.What does this study add to what we already know?Enabling other teams to compare conservative surgical treatment for placenta accreta with caesarean hysterectomy.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT06253832)Funding StatementThe author(s) received no specific funding for this work.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Ethics Committee of the Maternity and Neonatology Center of Tunis, Tunis, Tunisia (approval no. 03102020)I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.