Abstract
Aim:
To retrospectively statistically compare clinical and placental phenotypes of nonmacerated fetuses and live-born perinatal deaths in 3rd trimester pregnancies.
Methods:
Twenty-five clinical and 47 placental phenotypes were statistically compared among 93 cases of nonmacerated (intrapartum, or recent antepartum death) 3rd trimester fetal deaths (Group 1), 118 3rd trimester neonatal deaths (Group 2) and 4285 cases without perinatal mortality (Group 3).
Results:
Sixteen clinical and placental phenotypes were statistically significantly different between Group 3 and the two groups of perinatal deaths, which included eight placental phenotypes of fetal vascular malperfusion and eight other placental phenotypes of various etiology (amnion nodosum, 2-vessel umbilical cord, villous edema, increased extracellular matrix of chorionic villi, erythroblasts in fetal blood and trophoblastic lesions of shallow placentation). Statistically significant differences between Groups 1 and 2 were scant (oligohydramnios, fetal malformations, cesarean sections, hypercoiled umbilical cord and amnion nodosum being more common in the latter, and retroplacental hematoma more common in the former).
Conclusion:
Placental examination in neonatal mortality shows thrombotic pathology related to umbilical cord compromise and features of shallow placental implantation that are similar to those in nonmacerated stillbirth; however, the features of placental abruption were more common in recent antepartum death, as were the features related to neonatal congenital malformations in neonatal deaths.
Author’s statement
Conflict of interest: Authors state no conflict of interest.
Material and methods: Informed consent: Informed consent has not been obtained from all individuals included in this study. This is a retrospective study of diagnostic placental reports.
Ethical approval: The research related to human subject use has complied with all the relevant national regulations, and institutional policies, and is in accordance with the tenets of the Helsinki Declaration, and has been approved by the authors’ institutional review board or equivalent committee.
References
[1] Man J, Hutchinson JC, Ashworth M, Judge-Kronis L, Levine S, Sebire NJ. Stillbirth and intrauterine fetal death: role of routine histological organ sampling to determine cause of death. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016;48:596–601.10.1002/uog.16020Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[2] Korteweg FJ, Erwich JJHM, Timmer A, van der Meer J, Ravisé JM, Veeger NJ, et al. Evaluation of 1025 fetal deaths: proposed diagnostic workup. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206:53.e1–12.10.1016/j.ajog.2011.10.026Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[3] Kidron D, Bernheim J, Aviram R. Placental findings contributing to fetal death, a study of 120 stillbirths between 23 and 40 weeks gestation. Placenta. 2009;30:700–4.10.1016/j.placenta.2009.05.009Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[4] Pásztor N, Keresztúri A, Kozinszky Z, Pál A. Identification of causes of stillbirth through autopsy and placental examination reports. Fetal Pediatr Pathol. 2014;33:49–54.10.3109/15513815.2013.850132Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[5] Stanek J, Biesiada J. Relation of placental diagnosis in stillbirth to fetal maceration and gestational age at delivery. J Perinat Med. 2014;42:457–71.10.1515/jpm-2013-0219Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[6] Stanek J. Hypoxic patterns of placental injury: a review. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2013;137:706–20.10.5858/arpa.2011-0645-RASearch in Google Scholar PubMed
[7] Khong TY, Mooney EE, Ariel I, Balmus NC, Boyd TK, Brundler MA, et al. Sampling and definitions of placental lesions. Amsterdam placental workshop group consensus statement. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2016;140:698–713.10.5858/arpa.2015-0225-CCSearch in Google Scholar PubMed
[8] Stanek J, Biesiada J, Trzeszcz M. Clinicoplacental phenotypes vary with gestational age: an analysis by classical and clustering methods. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2014;93:392–8.10.1111/aogs.12350Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[9] Stanek J, Biesiada J. Clustering of maternal/fetal clinical conditions and outcomes and placental lesions. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206;493.e1–8.10.1016/j.ajog.2012.03.025Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[10] Kraus FT, Redline RW, Gersell DJ, Nelson DM, Dicke JM. Placental pathology. Washington, DC: American Registry of Pathology; 2004.10.55418/1881041891Search in Google Scholar
[11] Baergen RN. Manual of Benirschke and Kaufmann’s pathology of the human placenta. New York, NY: Springer; 2005.Search in Google Scholar
[12] Fox H, Sebire NJ. Pathology of the placenta. London: Saunders; 2007.10.1016/B978-1-4160-2592-4.50008-4Search in Google Scholar
[13] Stanek, J. Comparison of placental pathology in preterm, late-preterm, near-term, and term births. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210:234.e1–6.10.1016/j.ajog.2013.10.015Search in Google Scholar
[14] Stanek, J. Periarterial stem villous edema is associated with hypercoiled umbilical cord and stem obliterative endarteritis. Open J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;3:9–14.10.4236/ojog.2013.39A002Search in Google Scholar
[15] Johnson SL, Stanek J. E-cadherin/CD34 dual immunohistochemical stain in search for placental focal fetal vascular malperfusion. Laboratory Investigation. Nature. 2017;97: 291A–2A.Search in Google Scholar
[16] Stanek J. Chorionic disc extravillous trophoblasts in placental diagnosis. Am J Clin Pathol. 2011;136:540–7.10.1309/AJCPOZ73MPSPYFEZSearch in Google Scholar
[17] Stanek J. Placental membrane and placental disc microscopic chorionic cysts share similar clinicopathologic correlations. Pediatr Dev Pathol. 2011;14:1–9.10.2350/10-02-0795-OA.1Search in Google Scholar
[18] Stanek J, Biesiada J. Sensitivity and specificity of finding of multinucleate trophoblastic giant cells in decidua in placentas from high-risk pregnancies. Hum Pathol. 2012;43:261–8.10.1016/j.humpath.2011.03.012Search in Google Scholar
[19] Korteweg FJ, Gordijn SJ, Timmer A, Holm JP, Ravisé JM, Erwich JJHM. A placental cause of intra-uterine fetal death depends on the perinatal mortality classification system used. Placenta. 2008;29:71–80.10.1016/j.placenta.2007.07.003Search in Google Scholar
[20] Ptacek I, Sebire NJ, Man JA, Brownbill P, Heazell AEP. Systematic review of placental pathology reported in association with stillbirth. Placenta. 2014;35:552–62.10.1016/j.placenta.2014.05.011Search in Google Scholar
[21] Stanek J, Sheridan RM, Le LD, Crombleholme TM. Placental fetal thrombotic vasculopathy in severe congenital anomalies prompting EXIT procedure. Placenta. 2011;32:373–9.10.1016/j.placenta.2011.02.002Search in Google Scholar
[22] Stanek J. Association of coexisting morphological umbilical cord abnormality and clinical cord compromise with hypoxic and thrombotic placental histology. Virchows Arch. 2016;468:723–32.10.1007/s00428-016-1921-1Search in Google Scholar
[23] Carey JC, Rayburn WF. Nuchal cord encirclements and risk of stillbirth. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2000;69:173–4.10.1016/S0020-7292(99)00219-2Search in Google Scholar
[24] McDermott M, Gillan JE. Trophoblast basement membrane haemosiderosis in the placental lesion of fetal artery thrombosis: a marker for disturbance of maternofetal transfer. Placenta. 1995;16:171–8.10.1016/0143-4004(95)90006-3Search in Google Scholar
[25] Iams JD, Lynch CD. Stillbirth and lessons for pregnancy care. J Am Med Assoc. 2011;306:2506.10.1001/jama.2011.1822Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[26] Bar J, Schreiber L, Ben-Haroush A, Ahmed H, Golan A, Kovo M. The placental vascular component in early and late intrauterine fetal death. Thromb Res. 2012;130:901–5.10.1016/j.thromres.2012.09.013Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[27] Smith R, Maiti K, Aitken RJ. Unexplained antepartum stillbirth: a consequence of placental aging? Placenta. 2013;34:310–3.10.1016/j.placenta.2013.01.015Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[28] Gibbins KJ, Silver RM, Pinar H, Reddy UM, Parker CB, Thorsten V, et al. Stillbirth, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, and placental pathology. Placenta. 2016;43:61–8.10.1016/j.placenta.2016.04.020Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[29] Stallmach T, Hebisch G. Placental pathology: its impact on explaining prenatal and perinatal death. Virchows Arch. 2004;445:9–16.10.1007/s00428-004-1032-2Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[30] de Laat MWM, van der Meu JJC, Visser GHA, Franx A, Nikkels PGJ. Hypercoiling of the umbilical cord and placental maturation defect: associated pathology? Pediatr Dev Pathol. 2007;10:293–9.10.2350/06-01-0015.1Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[31] Machin GA, Ackerman J, Gilbert-Barness E. Abnormal umbilical cord coiling is associated with adverse perinatal outcome. Pediatr Dev Pathol. 2000;3:462–71.10.1007/s100240010103Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[32] Derricott H, Jones RL, Heazell AEP. Investigating the association of villitis of unknown etiology with stillbirth and fetal growth restriction. Placenta. 2013;34:856–62.10.1016/j.placenta.2013.07.003Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[33] Trudell AS, Cahill AG, Tuuli MG, Macones GA, Odibo AO. Risk of stillbirth after 37 weeks in pregnancies complicated by small-for-gestational age fetuses. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;208:376.e1–7.10.1016/j.ajog.2013.02.030Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[34] Stillbirth Collaborative Research Network Group. Causes of death among stillbirths. J Am Med Assoc. 2011;306:2459–68.10.1001/jama.2011.1823Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[35] Stillbirth Collaborative Research Network Writing Group. Association between stillbirth and risk factors known at pregnancy confirmation. J Am Med Assoc. 2011;306:2469–79.10.1001/jama.2011.1798Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[36] Chang KTE, Keating S, Costa S, Machin G, Kingdom J, Shannon P. Third trimester stillbirths: correlative neuropathology and placental pathology. Pediatr Dev Pathol. 2011;14:345–52.10.2350/10-07-0882-OA.1Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[37] Sun CCJ, Revell VO, Belli AJ, Viscardi RM. Discrepancy in pathologic diagnosis of placental lesions. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2002;126:706–9.10.5858/2002-126-0706-DIPDOPSearch in Google Scholar PubMed
[38] Stanek J. Placental hypoxic overlap lesions: a clinicopathologic correlation. J Obstet Gynecol Res. 2015;41:358–69.10.1111/jog.12539Search in Google Scholar PubMed
©2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
