4.5 Article

Women with Endometriosis, Especially Those Who Conceived with Assisted Reproductive Technology Have Increased Risk of Placenta Previa: Meta-analyses

Journal

JOURNAL OF KOREAN MEDICAL SCIENCE
Volume 33, Issue 34, Pages -

Publisher

KOREAN ACAD MEDICAL SCIENCES
DOI: 10.3346/jkms.2018.33.e234

Keywords

Endometriosis; Placenta Previa; Meta-analysis; Assisted Reproductive Technology

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Many women with endometriosis have become pregnant through assisted reproductive technology (ART), and have often experienced placenta previa (PP) during pregnancy. The objective of this study was to assess the association between women with endometriosis, especially those who conceived with ART, and the risk of PP. Methods: Two reviewers independently determined studies that were considered suitable for meta-analyses published in various medicine-related databases from March 1, 2004 through July 31, 2017 without language restrictions. Eight studies met the inclusion criteria, with a combined sample size of 21,930 women. Of these 21,930 pregnancies, 6,256 had endometriosis (endometriosis) and 15,674 had no endometriosis. Four of these studies included 8,161 women who conceived with ART, 1,640 of whom had endometriosis (endometriosis + ART), and 6,521 of whom did not have endometriosis. Meta-analyses were estimated with odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using random effect analysis according to heterogeneity of studies. Results: These meta-analyses showed women with endometriosis (endometriosis) have an increased risk of PP (OR, 4.038; 95% CI, 2.291-7.116; P= 0.000). These results showed women who conceived with ART (endometriosis + ART), have a substantially increased risk of PP (OR, 5.543; 95% CI, 1.659-18.523; P = 0.005). Conclusion: These meta-analyses demonstrate women with endometriosis have an increased risk of PP.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available