| Literature DB >> 34927512 |
Na Wang1, Dandan Shi1, Na Li1, Hongyuan Qi1.
Abstract
This study was designed to explore the expression and the diagnostic value of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1 (sFlt-1) in pernicious placenta previa (PPP) combined placental accreta/increta. A total of 140 PPP patients were enrolled and divided into two groups: 56 patients with placenta accreta/increta (PA group), and 84 patients without placenta accreta/increta (non-PA group). In the same period, 46 pregnant women without PPP who had undergone caesarean section were selected as controls. The levels of VEGF and sFlt-1 in serum were detected by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Diagnostic efficiency of VEGF and sFlt-1 in serum were evaluated by receiver operating characteristics curve. It was found that both VEGF and sFlt-1 had diagnostic value for PPP and placenta accreta/increta combined PPP. In addition, the levels of VEGF and sFlt-1 could be used to distinguish placenta accreta from placenta increta. VEGF was negatively correlated with sFlt-1 in PPP patients. In summary, the levels of VEGF and sFlt-1 could be used as auxiliary indicators to diagnose PPP and distinguish between placenta accreta and increta.KEY POINTSThe levels of VEGF and sFlt-1 could be used to distinguish placenta accreta from placenta increta.VEGF is negatively correlated with sFlt-1 in PPP patients.The levels of VEGF and sFlt-1 could be used as auxiliary indicators to diagnose PPP and distinguish between placenta accreta and increta.Entities:
Keywords: VEGF; pernicious placenta previa; placenta accreta; placenta increta; sFlt-1
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34927512 PMCID: PMC8725906 DOI: 10.1080/07853890.2021.1999492
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Med ISSN: 0785-3890 Impact factor: 4.709
Demographics and clinical characteristics of the patients with pernicious placenta previa (PPP) and healthy controls.
| Items | Study group |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control ( | PPP ( | |||
| Non-PA ( | PA ( | |||
| Age (years) | 28 (21, 35) | 29 (22, 34) | 30 (23, 37) | .165 |
| Gestational weeks at delivery | ||||
| <37 | 4 (8.7 %) | 40 (47.6%) | 35 (62.5%) | <.001 |
| ≥37 | 42 (91.3 %) | 44 (52.4%) | 21 (37.5%) | |
| Parity | ||||
| 0 | 22 (47.8 %) | 9 (10.7%) | 5 (8.9%) | <.001 |
| 1 | 17 (36.9 %) | 39 (46.4%) | 18 (32.2%) | |
| ≥2 | 7 (15.3 %) | 36 (42.9%) | 33 (58.9%) | |
| History of abortions | ||||
| 0 | 31 (67.4 %) | 41 (48.8%) | 19 (33.9%) | .013 |
| 1 | 12 (26.1 %) | 33 (39.3%) | 25 (44.6%) | |
| ≥2 | 3 (6.5 %) | 10 (11.9%) | 12 (21.5%) | |
| History of caesarean delivery | ||||
| 0 | 35 (76.1 %) | 30 (35.7%) | 16 (28.6%) | <.001 |
| 1 | 9 (19.6 %) | 29 (34.5%) | 14 (25.0%) | |
| ≥2 | 2 (4.3 %) | 25 (29.8%) | 26 (46.4%) | |
| Type of PPP | ||||
| Total placenta praevia | 23 (27.4%) | 34 (60.7%) | <.001 | |
| Partial placenta praevia | 40 (47.6%) | 14 (25.0%) | ||
| Marginal placenta praevia | 21 (25.0%) | 8 (14.3%) | ||
| Intraoperative haemorrhage (mL) | 288 (134, 572) | 664 (294, 1453) | 1273 (487, 2518) | <.001 |
| Hospitalization (days) | 4 (3, 7) | 6 (4, 9) | 9 (6, 15) | .027 |
The data presented are median (min., max.) or n (%). The comparisons of data among the three group were done by Kruskal–Wallis test or Chi-square test. PPP: pernicious placenta previa; PA: placenta accrete.
Figure 1.Comparisons of serum VEGF and sFlt-1 between pernicious placenta previa (n = 140) and healthy controls (n = 46) and the diagnosis values of serum VEGF and sFlt-1 on pernicious placenta previa compared to healthy controls. ELISA was used to analyze the serum concentrations of VEGF (A) and sFlt-1 (B). Data are presented as mean ± SD or n (%). ***p < .001. ROC analysis of serum concentrations of VEGF (C) and sFlt-1 (D).
Figure 2.Comparisons of serum VEGF and sFlt-1 between PPP without placenta accreta/increta (non-PA, n = 84) and PPP with placenta accreta/increta (PA, n = 56) and the diagnosis values of serum VEGF and sFlt-1 on placenta accreta/increta in PPP patients. ELISA was used to analyze the serum concentrations of VEGF (A) and sFlt-1 (B). Data are presented as mean ± SD or n (%). ***p < .001. ROC analysis of serum concentrations of VEGF (C) and sFlt-1 (D).
Figure 3.Comparisons of serum VEGF and sFlt-1 between different degree of placenta implantation in PPP patients and the diagnosis values of serum VEGF and sFlt-1 to identify placenta increta from placenta accreta. ELISA was used to analyze the serum concentrations of VEGF (A) and sFlt-1 (B) between placenta accrete (n = 35) and placenta increta (n = 21). Data are presented as mean ± SD or n (%). *p < .05; ***p < .001. ROC analysis of serum concentrations of VEGF (C) and sFlt-1 (D).
Figure 4.Pearson’s correlations between serum VEGF and sFlt-1 in PPP patients (n = 140).