The Jellyfish Sign: A New Sonographic Cervical Marker to Predict Maternal Morbidity in Abnormally Invasive Placenta Previa.

PURPOSE: To investigate the value of a new cervical sonographic sign, called the jellyfish sign (JS), for predicting the risk of maternal morbidity in cases of abnormally invasive placenta (AIP) previa totalis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective evaluation of transvaginal (TV) and transabdominal (TA) scans performed in all singleton pregnancies with placenta previa totalis. JS, i. e. the absence of the normal linear demarcation between the placenta previa and the cervix, was evaluated by TV scans. The presence/severity of AIP and outcomes of maternal morbidity were related to this sign. RESULTS: JS was noted in 8/39 (20.5 %) patients. The two analyzed groups, i. e. with and without JS, were similar. The specificity of JS in AIP diagnosis, histological findings of accreta/increta/percreta, need for caesarean hysterectomy or blood loss > 2000 ml ranges between 92 % and 96.2 %, with the PPV and NPV ranging between 71.4 % and 85.7 % and 61.3 % and 80.6 %, respectively. The JS group had a significant increase in blood loss (ml) (p = 0.003), transfusions (%) (p = 0.016), red blood cells (p = 0.002) and plasma (p = 0.002), admission to an postoperative intensive care unit (ICU) (%) (p = 0.002), hospitalization length (p < 0.001) and the need of cesarean hysterectomy (%) (p < 0.001). JS was independently correlated to cesarean hysterectomy (OR 25.6; 95 % CI 2.0:322.3, p = 0.012) and blood loss > 2000 ml (OR 16.6; 95 % CI 1.5:180.1, p = 0.021) also in a logistic regression model. CONCLUSION: JS is useful in predicting the increase in maternal morbidity: massive transfusion, admission to the ICU and cesarean hysterectomy related to intraoperative bleeding in patients with a previa AIP.

Prenatal diagnosis and postnatal follow-up of a child with mosaic trisomy 22 with several levels of mosaicism in different tissues.

We report on the case of a patient with mosaic trisomy 22, who was diagnosed prenatally by amniocentesis during the 16(th) week of pregnancy. In the foetus, three trisomic clones were found out of the nine that were analyzed (the other six clones had a 46,XY karyotype). Cytogenetic analysis of cord blood during the 20(th) week of pregnancy showed a normal male karyotype; however, a placental biopsy that was performed at the same time showed 100% and 95% trisomic cells in the chromosomal analysis of direct and long-term cultures, respectively. A follow-up ultrasonographic examination excluded major congenital malformations and the abdominal and cranial circumferences were normal until the 24(th) week of pregnancy. At this point, a deflection of the growth curve occurred and the values were persistently below the 3(rd) centile until birth. After birth, karyotypic and fluorescent in situ hybridisation analyses performed on the fibroblasts of the neonate showed that 3-4% of the cell lines were trisomic, and studies using microsatellite markers showed normal allelic segregation, which excluded uniparental disomy. The period of postnatal follow-up was characterised by a significant growth deficit (height and head circumference were less than the 3(rd) centile) and by mental retardation. The present case is compatible with other earlier reports that showed that the levels of trisomy 22 are tissue-specific and are of little help in establishing the prognosis of the chromosomal abnormality.