One-step conservative surgery vs hysterectomy for placenta accreta spectrum: a feasibility randomized controlled trial

Álbaro José Nieto-Calvache, Rozi Aditya Aryananda, José Miguel Palacios-Jaraquemada, Nareswari Cininta, Ariani Grace, Juan Pablo Benavides-Calvache, Clara Ivette Campos, Adriana Messa-Bryon, Liliana Vallecilla, Daniela Sarria, Juan Sebastian Galindo, Valentina Galindo-Velasco, Luisa Fernanda Rivera-Torres, Juan Manuel Burgos-Luna, Amarnath Bhide

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)


BACKGROUND: Placenta accreta spectrum is a serious condition associated with significant maternal morbidity and even mortality. The recommended treatment is hysterectomy. An alternative is 1-step conservative surgery, which involves the en bloc resection of the myometrium affected by placenta accreta spectrum along with the placenta, followed by uterine reconstruction. Currently, there are no studies comparing the 2 techniques in the setting of a randomized controlled trial. OBJECTIVE: We performed a prospectively registered multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing hysterectomy with 1-step conservative surgery. The aim was to collect feasibility and clinical outcomes of the 2 techniques in women assigned to hysterectomy or 1-step conservative surgery. In addition to assessing participants’ willingness to be randomized, we also collected data on intraoperative blood loss, transfusion requirement, serious adverse event, and other clinical outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Sixty women with strong antenatal suspicion of placenta accreta spectrum were assigned randomly to either hysterectomy (n=31) or 1-step conservative surgery (n=29). RESULTS: During a 20-month period, 60 of the 64 eligible patients (93.7%) underwent randomization. Intention-to-treat analysis showed that the clinical outcomes for 1-step conservative surgery were comparable to those of hysterectomy (median intraoperative blood loss, 1740 mL [interquartile range, 1010–2410] vs 1500 mL [interquartile range, 1122–2753]; odds ratio, 1 [1–1]; P=.942; median duration of surgery, 135 minutes [interquartile range, 111–180] vs 155 minutes [interquartile range, 120–185]; odds ratio, 0.99 [0.98–1]; P=.151; transfusion rate, 58.6% vs 61.3%; odds ratio, 0.96 [0.83–1.76]; P=.768; and adverse event rate, 17.2% vs 9.7%; odds ratio, 1.77 [0.43–10.19]; P=.398; respectively). In the subgroup of women with type 1 class on topographic classification, all participants allocated to 1-step surgery had successful outcomes, which were superior to those of hysterectomy. This was evidenced by the shorter surgery duration (median, 125 [interquartile range, 98–128] vs 180 [129–226] minutes; P=.002), lower transfusion rates (46.2% vs 82.4%), and fewer units of red blood cells transfused (median, 1 [interquartile range, 1–1.8] vs 3 [interquartile range, 2–4] units; P=.007). CONCLUSION: A randomized controlled trial comparing 2 surgical techniques for the treatment of placenta accreta spectrum is feasible. One-step conservative repair is a valid alternative to hysterectomy in the large majority of cases, but this can only be ascertained following intraoperative surgical staging.

Original languageEnglish
Article number101333
JournalAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology MFM
Publication statusAccepted/In press - 2024


  • accreta
  • randomized controlled trial
  • surgical technique
  • uterine sparing surgery


Dive into the research topics of 'One-step conservative surgery vs hysterectomy for placenta accreta spectrum: a feasibility randomized controlled trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this