Skip to main content
Download PDF

The association between of placenta previa and congenital abnormalities: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BMC Pediatrics volume 23, Article number: 606 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Congenital abnormalities, as one of the fetal complications of placenta previa, may cause health problems or disability of the child throughout life. This study aimed to determine the relationship between placenta previa and congenital abnormalities.

Methods

Potential articles were retrieved from three electronic databases (PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Web of Sciences) up to 21 May 2023 without limit of time and language. A random effect model was applied for meta-analysis. The heterogeneity was calculated based on I2 statistic and Cochrane Q-test. All analyses were conducted at the significance level of 0.05 using STATA software, version 14. The quality assessment of the included studies was performed using the improved Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

Results

In the initial search, 829 articles were retrieved. Finally, according to the inclusion criteria, eight studies were analyzed in the meta-analysis. A significant association was reported between placenta previa and risk of congenital abnormalities based on crude form (OR = 1.81, 95% CI = 1.34 to 2.28) and adjusted studies (OR = 6.38, 95% CI = 1.47 to 11.30). The high heterogeneity was observed among the studies reported based on adjusted and crude form, respectively (I2 = 97.9%, P = 0.000) (I2 = 80.6%, P = 0.000). Therefore, publication bias was not observed among studies. Seven studies of the included studies were of high quality.

Conclusion

Our study provides evidence that there is a positive and significant association between placenta previa and congenital malformations, including all structural anomalies, chromosomal defects, and congenital hypothyroidisms. Therefore, monitoring congenital abnormalities in the fetus of a mother with placenta previa is necessary.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Placenta previa is the complete or partial coverage of the internal cervical os with the placenta [1]. It is an important cause of maternal and fetal morbidity and mortality in pregnant [2]. The overall prevalence of placenta previa is estimated at 5.2 per 1000 pregnancies [3]. The exact etiology of placenta previa is unknown; however, prior cesarean section, previous placenta previa, and abortions, smoking during pregnancy, termination of pregnancy, intrauterine surgery, multifetal gestation, multi-parity, assisted reproductive technology, and advanced maternal age can be risk factors for placenta previa [4,5,6,7,39,9]. The most accurate and safest diagnosis method of placenta previa is ultrasonography [10].

Placenta previa causes both maternal and fetal complications. Life-threatening maternal outcomes include hemorrhage, and shock [11, 12]. Evidence indicates that postpartum anemia, blood transfusion, hysterectomy, septicemia, thrombophlebitis, and delayed discharge from the hospital are other maternal complications of placenta previa [9,10,11,14]. Babies born to mothers with placenta praevia are more likely to suffer from Apgar scores < 7 at 1 and 5 min, small for gestational age, low birth weight, congenital abnormalities [14], require resuscitation, and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission [15], stillbirth and neonatal death [11, 12].

Congenital abnormalities as one of the fetal complications of placenta previa, include all structural abnormalities (cardiovascular, digestive, respiratory, ear and nose, genital and urinary tracts, skin, musculoskeletal and nervous) and chromosomal abnormalities [12] which may cause health problems or disability of the child throughout life. In such a way that, based on the 2010 Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study [16, 17], congenital abnormalities cause 510 400 deaths in the world, 1% of all deaths, and rank 23rd among all causes of death [16]. In fact, deaths due to congenital abnormalities are really early and the burden in years of life lost (YLL) is higher [18]. Evidence indicates that although neonatal complications such as prematurity, stillbirth, and neonatal death have been well-documented [11, 12, 19, 20], knowledge of the association of placenta previa with congenital abnormalities is limited [21]. It seems that considering the importance of mortality and morbidity management of placenta previa in mother and fetus, especially the complication of congenital abnormalities, it is necessary to systematically study the relationship between placenta previa and congenital abnormalities. Our hypothesis in the present study was that there is a relationship between placenta previa and congenital abnormalities. These results may be able to provide appropriate solutions to the health system to better manage the burden of this problem. To the best of our knowledge, it was found that no systematic study has been done in this field. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the association between placenta previa and congenital abnormalities in the form of a systematic review.

Methods

Data sources

This study was performed based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines [22]. Potential articles were retrieved from three electronic databases (PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Web of Sciences, science direct, and Embase) up to 21 May 2023 without limit of time and language. This systematic review as approved by the Research Ethics Committee of Hamadan University of Medical Sciences (No. IR.UMSHA.REC.1402.441).

Search strategy

The search strategy was developed using Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). The search strategy was performed by keywords: (Placenta Previa or Placental Previa) and (fetal anomalies or fetal abnormality or congenital abnormalities or fetal malformation or congenital defects). The search strategy for PubMed/Medline is described in Supplementary file.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria were all full texts that identified the effect of placenta previa on congenital abnormalities. Qualitative studies, review studies, letters and correspondence, editorials, and conference proceedings were excluded.

Data extraction

The results of initial searches were independently screened by two authors (EJ and SK) according to titles, abstracts, and full texts. Any disagreement among the researchers regarding the exclusion or inclusion of articles in the study was resolved with discussion. All searched articles in the initial search were entered into EndNote X8 software. The data in extraction form were; first author, publication year, study design, study period, study subjects, placenta previa diagnosis, congenital abnormalities type, total sample size (subject with placenta previa), crude OR (95% CI), adjusted OR (95% CI); adjustment factors, and quality of study. To minimize retrieval bias, the inclusion criteria were manually checked for additional eligible documents that could have been missed during the mentioned database and grey literature search.

Heterogeneity assessment and publication bias

The heterogeneity was calculated based on I2 statistic [23] and Cochrane Q-test. The heterogeneity with I2 > 50% was high heterogeneity. For assessing publication bias, Egger’s [24] and Begg’s [25] tests were used.

Statistical analysis

We applied a random effect model for meta-analysis. The effect size was calculated using the odds ratio (OR) with the 95% confidence interval (CI). All analyses were conducted using STATA 14 (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA). Furthermore, for all statistical analyses, the significance level was set to 0.05.

Quality assessment tool

The quality assessment of the included studies was performed using the improved Newcastle-Ottawa Scale [26]. This scale has three sections including election (four items), comparability (two items), and exposure/outcomes (three items), and ranges from zero to nine. Two researchers conducted the quality assessment independently. Scores ≥ 7 points as high quality and scores < 7 points as low quality were considered. None of the studies were excluded based on quality assessment results.

Results

Results of the search and the included studies

A total of 829 articles were retrieved from the three electronic databases, PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Web of Sciences, science direct, and Embase. Three articles were identified by the manual check. After excluding 81 duplicate studies, we have identified articles by title, abstract, and full text. Finally, eight studies were reviewed in this systematic review (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
figure 1

PRISMA flow diagram of the systematic review and meta-analysis selection process

Full size image

The included studies in this meta-analysis were: seven cohort studies and one case-control studies. Details of the included studies are presented in Table 1.

Table 1 Main characteristics of the included studies in the systematic review and meta analyses
Full size table

Participants

In six studies, the study subjects were singletons [12, 14, 21, 25,26,29], and in two studies it was unknown [30, 31].

Study time and settings

Three studies were published in 2011 or later [21, 29, 31]. Other studies were published in 2003 or earlier [12, 14, 25,26,29]. Settings of the included studies were both hospital-based [14, 27, 27,28,31] and population-based [12, 21, 28].

Design of the studies

Of the eight included studies, seven had cohort design [12, 14, 21, 25,26,29, 31] and there was one case-control study [30].

Placenta previa diagnosis

Several diagnostic methods for placenta previa were mentioned in the included studies. Four studies used only ultrasound [21, 27,28,31]. In two studies, placenta previa diagnosis was conducted by ultrasound and during delivery [12, 14]. In the study of Brenner et al., placenta previa was diagnosed by 1131-albuminalbumin radioisotope technique [27]. In the study of Salihu et al., placenta previa was considered [28].

Congenital Abnormalities type

The four studies considered all structural and chromosomal congenital abnormalities [12, 14, 21, 27, 31]. In the study of Neri et al., only congenital heart defects were considered [30]. In two studies, only congenital abnormalities were mentioned and their type was not specified [28, 29].

Sample size of subject with placenta previa

In four studies, less than 500 [12, 14, 27, 30], in one study, less than 800 [29], and in three studies, more than 1000 placenta previa samples participated in the included studies [21, 28, 31].

Main analysis

We presented the association between placenta previa and congenital abnormalities in Fig. 2 based on adjusted and crude variables. A significant association was reported between placenta previa and risk of congenital abnormalities based on crude form (OR = 1.81, 95% CI = 1.34 to 2.28) and adjusted studies (OR = 6.38, 95% CI = 1.47 to 11.30). The high heterogeneity was observed among the studies reported based on adjusted and crude form, respectively (I2 = 97.9%, P = 0.000) (I2 = 80.6%, P = 0.000). The P-values for Begg and Egger’s regression were 0.139 and 0.679. Therefore, publication bias was not observed among studies.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Forest plot of the association between ART and placenta previa based on OR

Full size image

Risk of Bias of the included studies

We did not exclude studies based on the results of the quality assessment. Seven studies of the included studies were high quality and one study was low quality according to the NOS Scale (Table 1).

Discussion

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first meta-analysis that reports the association between placenta previa and congenital abnormalities. Our finding indicated that there was a significant association between placenta previa and risk of congenital abnormalities based on odds ratio reports in observational studies. In other words, the chance of congenital abnormalities of the fetus in mothers with placenta previa is 6.38 times higher than mothers without placenta previa. Evidence indicates that placenta previa can lead to adverse perinatal outcomes [4, 11, 32]. The effect of placenta previa on some adverse perinatal outcomes such as perinatal mortality and prematurity has been well-examined [19, 20], however, knowledge is still limited about its association with major congenital abnormalities [21]. Few population-based [12, 21, 28] and large hospital-based studies [14, 27, 27,28,31] have reported a positive association between placenta previa and congenital abnormalities but the association strength has widely varied due to differences in study designs, data sources, study subjects, sample size, selection criteria, method of placenta previa diagnosis, and lack of adequate information to control potential confounders [21, 31].

The pathophysiology of placenta previa is interesting due to its ability to cause congenital abnormalities. Based on embryology science, there is the highest risk of major congenital abnormalities in the 3–12 weeks after conception (critical window of organogenesis). In fact, a majority of birth defects are known to occur in the first 3 months of pregnancy [33]. Several probable mechanisms during organogenesis such as abnormal intra-uterine bleeding, hypoxia, and infection can be harmful to the fetus. In past studies, the positive association between placenta previa and intra-uterine infections and inflammation are reported [34, 35]. It is well-documented that placenta previa can cause bleeding throughout pregnancy [19]. In such a way that if the placenta remains in the lower and less vascularized region of the cervix for a long time, frequent contraction or cervical effacement and dilatation can lead to atrophy and asymptomatic bleeding, which could have damaging effects on the fetus [4]. Furthermore, the site of abnormal placental implantation can reduce the functional efficiency of the placenta [36] and cause fetal hypoxia [37]. The evidence shows that hypoxia during pregnancy lead to cardiovascular abnormalities [38]. It is well established that advancing maternal age and smoking are associated with genetic and chromosomal abnormalities. In women with advances maternal age and smoking, the higher incidence of antepartum complications such as miscarriage, gestational diabetes, placenta previa, and placental abruption have been approved. Therefore, chromosomal and genetic abnormalities may occur associated with placenta previa” [31].

A hospital-based study indicated that placenta previa was independently associated with a 16-fold increased risk of congenital abnormalities [14]. Also, Salihu et al., reported that mothers with placenta previa had a significantly higher chance of birthing infants with congenital abnormalities compared with mothers without placenta previa [28]. In 2015, a cohort study using a large population-based was conducted by Kancherla et al. in Finland [21]. They claimed that their study attempted to overcome the limitations reported in previous studies regarding the association between placenta previa and major congenital abnormalities [12, 14, 26,27,30]. Kancherla et al. found that there was a significant association between placenta previa and major congenital abnormalities in singleton births, however future studies are needed to investigate the association between placenta previa and individual types of congenital abnormalities [21]. In the conducted studies have pointed out the congenital abnormalities in two general types including structural and chromosomal abnormalities and it is not reported in detail. In the study of Anwar et al., in addition to structural and chromosomal abnormalities, hypothyroidism is also investigated [31]. It seems that it is necessary to conduct more studies regarding the relationship between placenta previa and congenital abnormalities type in order to determine which type of abnormality is more likely to occur in the fetus in the presence of placenta previa. Also, only in the study of Neri et al., the diagnosis method of abnormalities was specified. In such a way that congenital heart defects were diagnosed by complete cardiac workup which included physical examination, electrocardiography, chest roentgenogram and echocardiogram [30].

Confounding variables were controlled in some the included studies such as parity, fetal sex, smoking, socioeconomic status, chorionic villus biopsy, in vitro fertilization (IVF), pre-existing, diabetes, depression, preeclampsia, prior caesarean [21], and maternal age [12, 21]. As is clear, there is a lack of adequate information to control potential confounders in most of the included studies. Two strengths can be considered for the present study. First, seven out of eight studies were of high quality. Another strong point is that a significant relationship was found between placenta previa and congenital abnormalities.

Limitation.

High heterogeneity is one of the limitations of research, which even with controlling the confounding variables, may still remain high. Heterogeneity refers to diversity and differences among the population or samples under study. The presence of heterogeneity can make research results susceptible to influence and less generalizable to the population. Therefore, controlling confounding variables can be a method to reduce these types of effects. However, it is not always possible to control all confounding variables in research, and therefore high heterogeneity can be one of the limitations of research that can have negative effects on the generalizability of results.

Conclusion

Our study provides evidence that there is a positive and significant association between placenta previa and congenital malformations, including all structural anomalies, chromosomal defects, and congenital hypothyroidisms. Therefore, monitoring congenital abnormalities in the fetus of a mother with placenta previa is necessary.

Data Availability

All supporting data is available through the corresponding author.

References

  1. Wang Y, Hu C, Pan N, Chen C, Wu R. Prophylactic uterine artery embolization in second-trimester pregnancy termination with complete placenta previa. J Int Med Res. 2019;47(1):345–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. He Y, Liu M, Yang YJ, Li L, Huang Q, Liu L. Prophylactic uterine artery embolization during cesarean delivery for management of Hemorrhage in complete placenta previa: an observational study. Medicine. 2023;102(24):e34052.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Cresswell JA, Ronsmans C, Calvert C, Filippi V. Prevalence of placenta praevia by world region: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Trop Med Int Health: TM IH. 2013;18(6):712–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Oyelese Y, Smulian JC. Placenta previa, placenta accreta, and vasa previa. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107(4):927–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Rasmussen S, Albrechtsen S, Dalaker K. Obstetric history and the risk of placenta previa. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2000;79(6):502–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Clark SL. Placenta previa and abruptio placenta. In: Creasy RK, Resnik R, editors. Maternal-fetal medicine. 4th ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 1999. pp. 616–3.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Silver RM. Abnormal placentation: Placenta Previa, Vasa Previa, and Placenta Accreta. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126(3):654–68.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Jenabi E, Afshari M. The Association between Placenta Previa and the Risk of Breech Presentation: A Meta-analysis. Advances in Human Biology. 2023;13(2)

  9. Jenabi E, Salimi Z, Bashirian S, Khazaei S, Ayubi E. The risk factors associated with placenta previa: Anumbrella review. Placenta. 2022;117:21–7

  10. Cunningham FG, Leveno KJ, Bloom SL, Hauth JC, Gilstar LC, Wenstrom KD. Williams Obstetrics. 22th. New York: Mc Grawhill; 2005. 435–53.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bahar A, Abusham A, Eskandar M, Sobande A, Alsunaidi M. Risk factors and pregnancy outcome in different types of placenta previa. J Obstet Gynecol Canada: JOGC = Journal D’obstetrique et gynecologie du Can: JOGC. 2009;31(2):126–31.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Crane JMG, Van Den Hof MC, Dodds L, Armson BA, Liston R. Neonatal outcomes with placenta previa. Obstet Gynecol. 1999;93(4 SUPPL):541–4.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Adere A, Mulu A, Temesgen F. Neonatal and maternal Complications of Placenta Praevia and its risk factors in Tikur Anbessa Specialized and Gandhi Memorial hospitals: unmatched case-control study. J Pregnancy. 2020;2020:5630296.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Sheiner E, Shoham-Vardi I, Hallak M, Hershkowitz R, Katz M, Mazor M. Placenta previa: obstetric risk factors and pregnancy outcome. J Maternal-Fetal med. 2001;10(6):414–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Prasanth S, Mehta P, Rajeshwari K. Maternal and fetal outcome of placenta previa in a tertiary care institute: a prospective two year study. Indian J Obstet Gynecol Res. 2016;3(3):274–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Lozano R, Naghavi M, Foreman K, Lim S, Shibuya K, Aboyans V, Abraham J, Adair T, Aggarwal R, Ahn SY, et al. Global and regional mortality from 235 causes of death for 20 age groups in 1990 and 2010: a systematic analysis for the global burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet (London England). 2012;380(9859):2095–128.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Murray CJ, Ezzati M, Flaxman AD, Lim S, Lozano R, Michaud C, Naghavi M, Salomon JA, Shibuya K, Vos T, et al. GBD 2010: a multi-investigator collaboration for global comparative descriptive epidemiology. Lancet (London England). 2012;380(9859):2055–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Liu L, Johnson HL, Cousens S, Perin J, Scott S, Lawn JE, Rudan I, Campbell H, Cibulskis R, Li M, et al. Global, regional, and national causes of child mortality: an updated systematic analysis for 2010 with time trends since 2000. Lancet (London England). 2012;379(9832):2151–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Faiz AS, Ananth CV. Etiology and risk factors for placenta previa: an overview and meta-analysis of observational studies. J maternal-fetal Neonatal Medicine: Official J Eur Association Perinat Med Federation Asia Ocean Perinat Soc Int Soc Perinat Obstet. 2003;13:175–90.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Usta IM, Hobeika EM, Musa AA, Gabriel GE, Nassar AH. Placenta previa-accreta: risk factors and Complications. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;193(3 Pt 2):1045–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kancherla V, Räisänen S, Gissler M, Kramer MR, Heinonen S. Placenta previa and risk of major congenital malformations among singleton births in Finland. Birth Defects Research Part A - Clinical and Molecular Teratology. 2015;103(6):527–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Page MJ, Moher D, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, Shamseer L, Tetzlaff JM, Akl EA, Brennan SE, et al. PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n160.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2002;21(11):1539–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Egger M, Smith GD, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ (Clinical Research ed). 1997;315(7109):629.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Begg CB, Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics. 1994;50(4):1088–101.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Non-Randomized Studies in Meta-Analysis [Availablefrom: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp].

  27. Brenner WE, Edelman DA, Hendricks CH. Characteristics of patients with placenta previa and results of expectant management. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1978;132(2):180–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Salihu HM, Li Q, Rouse DJ, Alexander GR. Placenta previa: neonatal death after live births in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003;188(5):1305–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Rosenberg T, Pariente G, Sergienko R, Wiznitzer A, Sheiner E. Critical analysis of risk factors and outcome of placenta previa. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2011;284(1):47–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Neri A, Manor Y, Matityahu A, Biieden L. Placenta previa and congenital cardiac anomalies. Fetal Diagn Ther. 1989;4(2–3):138–40.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Anwar A, Farhan AM, Zalat T. Placenta previa and risk of congenital malformations among singleton births. Al-Azhar Int Med J. 2020;1(2):183–178.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Tuzovic L. Complete versus incomplete placenta previa and obstetric outcome. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2006;93(2):110–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Zhang Y, Sun F, Yuan K, Du Y, Wu L, Ge Y, Zhang Z, Sun S, Cao W. Ambient temperature and major structural anomalies: a retrospective study of over 2 million newborns. Sci Total Environ. 2023;882:163613.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Park CW, Moon KC, Park JS, Jun JK, Yoon BH. The frequency and clinical significance of intra-uterine Infection and inflammation in patients with placenta previa and preterm labor and intact membranes. Placenta. 2009;30(7):613–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Madan I, Romero R, Kusanovic JP, Mittal P, Chaiworapongsa T, Dong Z, Mazaki-Tovi S, Vaisbuch E, Alpay Savasan Z, Yeo L, et al. The frequency and clinical significance of intra-amniotic Infection and/or inflammation in women with placenta previa and vaginal bleeding: an unexpected observation. J Perinat Med. 2010;38(3):275–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Varma TR. Fetal growth and placental function in patients with placenta praevia. J Obstet Gynecol Br Commonw. 1973;80(4):311–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Neri A, Gorodesky I, Bahary C, Ovadia Y. Impact of placenta previa on intrauterine fetal growth. Isr J Med Sci. 1980;16(6):429–32.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Haring OM. Cardiac malformations in the rat induced by maternal hypercapnia with hypoxia. Circul Res. 1966;19(3):544–51.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the Vice-chancellor for Research and Technology of Hamadan University of Medical Sciences for financial support.

Funding

This study was financially supported by Vice-chancellor for Research and Technology of Hamadan University of Medical Sciences.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Autism Spectrum Disorders Research Center, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran

    Ensiyeh Jenabi & Saeid Bashirian

  2. Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran

    Saeid Bashirian

  3. Department of Community Health Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran

    Sahar Khoshravesh

  4. Chronic Diseases (Home Care) Research Center, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran

    Sahar Khoshravesh

Authors
  1. Ensiyeh Jenabi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Saeid Bashirian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sahar Khoshravesh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Study design: SB, EJ, SK, Data acquisition, analysis and interpretation: EJ, SK, writing of the first draft: SB, EJ, SK, revising first draft for important intellectual content: EJ, SK, All the authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sahar Khoshravesh.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee at Hamadan University of Medical Sciences (No. IR.UMSHA.REC. 1402.441).

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jenabi, E., Bashirian, S. & Khoshravesh, S. The association between of placenta previa and congenital abnormalities: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. BMC Pediatr 23, 606 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12887-023-04433-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12887-023-04433-z

Keywords

BMC Pediatrics

ISSN: 1471-2431

Contact us