==== Front BMC Pregnancy Childbirth BMC Pregnancy Childbirth BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 1471-2393 BioMed Central London 5805 10.1186/s12884-023-05805-0 Research Clinical significance of retained products of conception in placenta previa: a retrospective analysis Kishimoto Naohisa Miyamoto Morikazu morikazu1118@hotmail.co.jp Imauji Akari Takada Minori Nishitani Soko Tanabe Risa Ito Tsubasa Hada Taira Otsuka Yuka Takano Masashi grid.416620.7 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, National Defense Medical College Hospital, 3-2, Namiki, Tokorozawa, Saitama 359-8513 Japan 30 6 2023 30 6 2023 2023 23 48130 12 2022 21 6 2023 © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 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. Background Retained products of conception (RPOC) often cause severe postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) but the clinical significance of RPOC in placenta previa is unclear. This study aimed to investigate the clinical significance of RPOC in women with placenta previa. The primary outcome was to evaluate risk factors of RPOC and the secondary outcome was to consider risk factors of severe PPH. Methods Singleton pregnant women with placenta previa who underwent cesarean section (CS) and placenta removal during the operation at the National Defense Medical College Hospital between January 2004 and December 2021 were identified. A retrospective analysis was performed to examine the frequency and risk factors of RPOC and the association of RPOC with severe PPH in pregnant women with placenta previa. Results This study included 335 pregnant women. Among these, 24 (7.2%) pregnant women developed RPOC. Pregnant women with prior CS (Odds Ratio (OR) 5.98; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 2.35–15.20, p < 0.01), major previa (OR 3.15; 95% CI 1.19–8.32, p < 0.01), and placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) (OR 92.7; 95% CI 18.39–467.22, p < 0.01) were more frequent in the RPOC group. Multivariate analysis revealed that prior CS (OR 10.70; 95% CI 3.47–33.00, p < 0.01,) and PAS (OR 140.32; 95% CI 23.84–825.79, p < 0.01) were risk factors for RPOC. In pregnant women who have placenta previa with RPOC or without RPOC, the ratio of severe PPH were 58.3% and 4.5%, respectively (p < 0.01). Furthermore, the occurrence of prior CS (OR 9.23; 95% CI 4.02–21.20, p < 0.01), major previa (OR 11.35; 95% CI 3.35–38.38, p < 0.01), placenta at the anterior wall (OR 3.44; 95% CI 1.40–8.44, p = 0.01), PAS (OR 16.47; 95% CI 4.66–58.26, p < 0.01), and RPOC (OR 29.70; 95% CI 11.23–78.55, p < 0.01) was more in pregnant women with severe PPH. In the multivariate analysis for severe PPH, prior CS (OR 4.71; 95% CI 1.29–17.13, p = 0.02), major previa (OR 7.50; 95% CI 1.98–28.43, p < 0.01), and RPOC (OR 13.26; 95% CI 3.61–48.63, p < 0.01) were identified as risk factors. Conclusions Prior CS and PAS were identified as risk factors for RPOC in placenta previa and RPOC is closely associated with severe PPH. Therefore, a new strategy for RPOC in placenta previa is needed. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12884-023-05805-0. Keywords Retained products of conception Placenta previa Postpartum hemorrhage Placenta accrete spectrum issue-copyright-statement© BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2023 ==== Body pmcBackground Retained products of conception (RPOC) are defined as residual trophoblast-derived tissue that remains in the uterus after delivery, abortion, or miscarriage [1]. The overall frequency of the development of RPOC was reported to range from 1 to 6% [1–5]. The causes of RPOC have been identified as primipara, uterine atony, placenta accreta spectrum (PAS), history of RPOC, preterm delivery, prolonged use of oxytocin, previous uterine surgeries, and uterine abnormalities [1–5]. If not treated properly, patients with RPOC often develop severe postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) and endometritis [6, 7]. Placenta previa is defined as an abnormality of the placental location where placental parenchyma partially or completely covers the internal uterine ostium, which occasionally causes severe PPH [8–10]. Placenta previa is frequently complicated by PAS, which is considered a risk factor for RPOC [3]. Therefore, placenta previa may be closely associated with RPOC. Although both RPOC and placenta previa are associated with severe PPH [6, 8], the clinical significance of RPOC in placenta previa is unclear because there have been few reports on it [11, 12]. In this study, we retrospectively examined the incidence and risk factors of RPOC and investigated whether RPOC is related to severe PPH in patients with placenta previa. Methods Patient selection Singleton pregnant women with placenta previa who underwent cesarean section (CS) and placenta removal during CS at the National Defense Medical College Hospital between January 2004 and December 2021 were identified. Patients without clinical information were excluded from the study. RPOC was diagnosed using ultrasonography (US), contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT), and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) according to previous reports until seven days after CS [3, 6, 12–16]. When we suspected RPOC by US findings, intraoperatively and severe PPH, we implemented CT or MRI. Representative images of RPOC are shown in Fig. 1. A previous report classified placenta previa as major and minor previa [8, 17]. Cases of major previa were defined as those with a placenta that covered the internal cervical os, while cases with minor previa were those with the leading edge of the placenta, located within 2 cm from internal cervical OS, but did not cover the cervical os [8, 17–19]. PAS was finally diagnosed in all cases by pathological examination of the placenta and uterus (Fig. 2). When we suspected PAS intraoperatively, we used intravenous administration of uterotonic, insertion of uterine balloon tamponade, packing of sterile gauze into the vagina and compression suture during operation. If massive hemorrhage continued after operation, we considered UAE. When severe hemorrhage sustained after UAE, we might make a decision of hysterectomy [8, 20]. Severe PPH was defined as >1000 ml of blood loss within 24 h of CS [21–25]. Patients select flow chart showed at Fig. 3. Fig. 1 These images were diagnosed for retained products of conception (RPOC) in pregnant patients with placenta previa after operation. RPOC was represented as an echogenic mass at transvaginal color Doppler ultrasonography (US) after one day of operation (a), which was detected no flow, a heterogenous signal area at T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (b), and a high signal area at T2-weighted MRI (c) and contrase-enhanced T1-weighted MRI (d) (red arrow heads show) Fig. 2 The pathological images of placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) in a pregnant patient with placenta previa. These images expressed a pathological feature of PAS; findings of invasion of trophoblastic tissue into the myometrium (red arrow heads show) and fibrin deposition in in some areas (blue arrow heads show). (a × 40, (b) × 100)) Fig. 3 A study flow chart in pregnant patients with placenta previa. All patients with placenta previa were performed cesarean section (CS) (*). Retained products of conceptions (RPOC) (**) was diagnosed using ultrasonography (US), contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT), and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) according to previous reports until seven days after CS. Severe postpartum hemorrhage (severe PPH) (***) was defined as > 1000 ml of blood loss within 24 h of CS Statistical analysis The chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests were used to evaluate the clinicopathological features. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed using logistic regression analysis. Multivariate analysis was performed using variables with statistical significance in univariate analysis. The level of statistical significance was set at P < 0.05. Results During the observational period, 351 singleton pregnant women with placenta previa were identified, but 16 were excluded because of inadequate clinical information. Consequently, 335 patients were included in the analysis. Among them, 24 (7.2%) were complicated by RPOC. In RPOC group, nine of 24 patients were suspected beforehand, sixteen of them intraoperatively, and seven both by beforehand and intraoperatively. Nine of 24 patients got pathological diagnosis of PAS, finally. Compared with pregnant women without RPOC, those with placenta previa and RPOC had a higher frequency of prior CS (p < 0.01), major previa (p < 0.01), and PAS (p < 0.01) (Table 1). Furthermore, they developed higher intraoperative blood loss (p < 0.01), postpartum hemorrhage (p < 0.01), and total blood loss (p < 0.01). Hence, all patients underwent US, and nine (2.7%) were diagnosed with RPOC.Table 1 Characteristics of all pregnant women with placenta previa about retained products of concepts (RPOC) Pregnant women with RPOC Pregnant women without RPOC p-value n = 24 n = 311 Maternal age   > 35 years 14 (58.3%) 140 (45.0%) 0.29   < 35 years 10 (41.7%) 171 (55.0%) Gestational age at delivery   > 37 weeks 14 (58.3%) 199 (64.0%) 0.66   < 37 weeks 10 (41.7%) 112 (36.0%) Parity  Primipara 9 (37.5%) 161 (51.8%) 0.21  Multipara 15 (62.5%) 150 (48.2%) In vitro fertilization pregnancy  Yes 5 (20.8%) 38 (12.2%) 0.21  No 19 (79.2%) 273 (87.8%) Tocolytic agent use  Yes 14 (58.3%) 124 (39.9%) 0.09  No 10 (41.7%) 187 (60.1%) Warning bleedinga  Yes 11 (45.8%) 86 (27.7%) 0.07  No 13 (54.2%) 225 (72.3%) Prior cesarean section  Yes 11 (45.8%) 33 (10.6%)  < 0.01  No 13 (54.2%) 278 (89.4%) The mode of cesarean section  Emergency 6 (25.0%) 67 (21.5%) 0.80  Elective 18 (75.0%) 244 (78.5%) The classification of placenta previa  major previab 18 (75.0%) 137 (44.0%)  < 0.01  minor previac 6 (25.0%) 174 (56.0%) Main location of placenta  Anterior wall 6 (25.0%) 34 (10.9%) 0.052  Posterior wall 18 (75.0%) 277 (89.1%) Placenta accreta spectrum  Yes 9 (37.5%) 2 (0.6%)  < 0.01  No 15 (62.5%) 309 (99.4%) Prior endometrial curettage  Yes 8 (33.3%) 83 (26.7%) 0.48  No 16 (66.7%) 228 (73.3%) Magnetic resonance imaging after operation  Yes 14 (58.3%) 14 (4.5%)  < 0.01  No 10 (41.7%) 297 (95.5%) Intraoperative blood loss (ml)  median (range) 1849 (724–4936) 1119 (265–3418)  < 0.01 Postpartum hemorrhage (ml)  median (range) 1868 (20–8748) 120 (0–3261)  < 0.01 Total blood loss (ml)  median (range) 4025 (789–13,172) 1270 (287–5121)  < 0.01 aWarning bleeding was defined as painless genital bleeding from the placenta bMajor previa was defined as a placenta that covered the internal cervical os cMinor previa was defined as the leading edge of the placenta, which was located within 2 cm from internal cervical OS but did not cover the cervical os We suspected RPOC in 32 of 335 (9.6%) patients with placenta previa by intraoperative findings or severe PPH, and we were performed by CT in one of them and MRI in 31 of them, following ultrasound examination. The woman who received CT and 14 out of 31 (45.1%) pregnant women who underwent MRI were diagnosed with RPOC. In the univariate analysis, prior CS (odds ratio (OR), 7.13; p < 0.01), major previa (OR, 3.86; p < 0.01), placenta at the anterior wall (OR, 2.72; p = 0.048), and PAS (OR, 92.7; p < 0.01) were identified. Multivariate analysis revealed that prior CS (odds ratio [OR] 10.70; p < 0.01) and PAS (OR 140.32; p < 0.01) were independent risk factors for RPOC (Table 2).Table 2 Univariate and multivariate analysis to investigate the risk factor of retained products of conception in pregnant women with placenta previa Univariate analysis Multivariate analysisd Odds ratio (95% Confidence interval) p-value Odds ratio (95% Confidence interval) p-value Maternal age   > 35 years vs < 35 years 1.68 (0.73–3.92) 0.22 Gestational age at delivery   > 37 weeks vs < 37 weeks 1.27 (0.55–2.95) 0.58 Parity  Primipara vs Multipara 0.57 (0.24–1.33) 0.19 In vitro fertilization pregnancy  Yes vs. No 1.84 (0.65–5.20) 0.25 Tocolytic agent use  Yes vs. No 2.08 (0.90–4.84) 0.09 Warning bleedinga  Yes vs. No 2.21 (0.96–5.13) 0.06 Prior cesarean section  Yes vs. No 7.13 (2.96–17.19)  < 0.01 10.70 (3.47–33.00)  < 0.01 The mode of cesarean section  Emergency vs Elective 1.21 (0.46–3.18) 0.69 The classification of placenta previa  Major previab vs Minor previac 3.86 (1.49–9.99)  < 0.01 1.72 (0.55–5.42) 0.35 Main location of placenta  Anterior wall vs Posterior wall 2.72 (1.01–7.32) 0.048 1.38 (0.37–5.7) 0.63 Placenta accreta spectrum  Yes vs. No 92.7 (18.39–467.22)  < 0.01 140.32 (23.84–825.79)  < 0.01 Prior endometrial curettage  Yes vs. No 1.37 (0.57–3.33) 0.48 aWarning bleeding was defined ass painless genital bleeding from the placenta bMajor previa was defined as a placenta that covered the internal cervical os cMinor previa was defined as the leading edge of the placenta, which was located within 2 cm from internal cervical OS but did not cover the cervical os dMultivariate analysis was adjusted for prior cesarean section, the classification of placenta previa, main location of placenta, and placenta accreta spectrum Of these, 28 (8.4%) pregnant women with placenta previa developed severe PPH. The proportion of pregnant women with placenta previa and severe PPH who experienced multipara (p = 0.048), prior CS (p < 0.01), major previa (p < 0.01), placenta at the anterior wall (p = 0.01), PAS (p < 0.01), and RPOC (p < 0.01) was more than those with placenta previa without severe PPH. Ten patients with RPOC had no severe PPH. When we performed them by routine US before leaving hospital, they were diagnosed by chance. (Table 3). In univariate analysis, multiparity (OR 0.43; p = 0.04), prior CS (OR 9.23; p < 0.01), major previa (OR 11.35; p < 0.01), placenta at the anterior wall (OR 3.44; p < 0.01), PAS (OR 16.47; p < 0.01), and RPOC (OR 29.70; p < 0.01) were identified as risk factors for severe PPH. Multivariate analysis showed that prior CS (OR, 4.71; p < 0.01), major previa (OR, 7.50; p < 0.01), and RPOC (OR, 13.26; p < 0.01) were independent risk factors for severe PPH (Table 4).Table 3 Characteristics of all pregnant women with placenta previa according to the amount of the postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) Pregnant patients with severe PPHa Pregnant patients without severe PPH p-value n = 28 n = 307 Maternal age   > 35 years 14 (50.0%) 140 (45.6%) 0.70   < 35 years 14 (50.0%) 167 (54.4%) Gestational age at delivery   > 37 weeks 18 (64.3%) 195 (63.5%) 1.00   < 37 weeks 10 (35.7%) 112 (36.5%) Parity  Primipara 9 (32.1%) 161 (52.6%) 0.048  Multipara 19 (67.9%) 146 (47.4%) In vitro fertilization pregnancy  Yes 3 (10.7%) 40 (13.0%) 1.00  No 25 (89.3%) 267 (87.0%) Tocolytic agent use  Yes 13 (46.4%) 125 (40.7%) 0.55  No 15 (53.6%) 182 (59.3%) Warning bleedingb  Yes 10 (35.7%) 87 (28.3%) 0.39  No 18 (64.3%) 220 (71.7%) Prior CS  Yes 14 (30.0%) 30 (9.8%)  < 0.01  No 14 (0.0%) 277 (90.2%) The mode of cesarean section  Emergency 6 (21.4%) 67 (21.8%) 1.00  Elective 22 (78.6%) 240 (78.2%) The classification of placenta previa  Major previac 25 (89.3%) 130 (42.4%)  < 0.01  Minor previad 3 (10.7%) 177 (57.6%) Main location of placenta  Anterior wall 8 (28.6%) 32 (10.4%) 0.01  Posterior wall 20 (71.4%) 275 (89.6%) Placenta accreta spectrum  Yes 6 (21.4%) 5 (1.6%)  < 0.01  No 22 (78.6%) 302 (98.4%) Prior endometrial curettage  Yes 6 (21.4%) 85 (27.7%) 0.66  No 22 (78.6%) 222 (72.3%) Retained products of conception  Yes 14 (50.0%) 10 (3.3%)  < 0.01  No 14 (50.0%) 297 (96.7%) PPH postpartum hemorrhage, CS cesarean section aSevere PPH was defined as > 1000 ml of blood loss within 24 h of CS bWarning bleeding was defined as painless genital bleeding from the placenta cMajor previa was defined as the placenta that covered the internal cervical os dMinor previa was defined as the leading edge of the placenta, which was located within 2 cm from internal cervical OS but did not cover the cervical os Table 4 Univariate and multivariate analysis to examine the risk factor of severe PPHa in pregnant women with placenta previa Univariate analysis Multivariate analysis Odds ratio (95% Confidence interval) p-value Odds ratio (95% Confidence interval) p-value Maternal age   > 35 years vs. < 35 years 1.19 (0.55–2.59) 0.66 Gestational age at delivery   > 37 weeks vs. < 37 weeks 1.03 (0.46–2.32) 0.94 Parity  Primipara vs Multipara 0.43 (0.19–0.98) 0.04 0.95 (0.27–3.33) 0.93 In vitro fertilization pregnancy  Yes vs. No 0.80 (0.23–2.78) 0.73 Tocolytic agent use  Yes vs. No 1.26 (0.58–2.74) 0.56 Warning bleedingb  Yes vs. No 1.40 (0.62–3.16) 0.41 Prior CS  Yes vs. No 9.23 (4.02–21.20)  < 0.01 4.71 (1.29–17.13) 0.02 The mode of cesarean section  Emergency vs. Elective 0.98 (0.38–2.51) 0.96 The classification of placenta previa  Major previac vs. Minor previad 11.35 (3.35–38.38)  < 0.01 7.50 (1.98–28.43)  < 0.01 Main location of placenta  Anterior wall vs. Posterior wall 3.44 (1.40–8.44)  < 0.01 1.83 (0.56–6.00) 0.32 Placenta accreta spectrum  Yes vs. No 16.47 (4.66–58.26)  < 0.01 2.53 (0.39–16.46) 0.33 Prior endometrial curettage  Yes vs. No 0.71 (0.28–1.82) 0.48 Retained products of conception  Yes vs. No 29.70 (11.23–78.55)  < 0.01 13.26 (3.61–48.63)  < 0.01 PPH postpartum hemorrhage, CS cesarean section aSevere PPH was defined as > 1000 ml of blood loss within 24 h of CS bWarning bleeding was defined as painless genital bleeding from the placenta cMajor previa was defined as the placenta that covered the internal cervical os dMinor previa was defined as the leading edge of the placenta, which was located within 2 cm from internal cervical OS but did not cover the cervical os Details of the 14 cases of RPOC that developed severe PPH show in supplementary material 1. Thirteen (92.9%) cases required additional allogeneic blood transfusions. Nine (64.2%) cases needed uterine artery embolization (UAE) after CS. Within 11 weeks after CS, dilation and curettage (D&C) were performed to remove placenta in three (21.4%) cases. Ten (71.4%) patients received intrauterine balloon tamponade to decrease the amount of blood loss after CS. Two (14.3%) patients required supravaginal amputation of the uterus and total hysterectomy as UAE and intrauterine balloon tamponade could not stop bleeding after CS. Thirteen (92.9%) patients with RPOC who developed severe PPH had major previa. Details of the 10 pregnant women with RPOC without severe PPH show in supplementary material 2. Two (20%) of them required additional allogeneic blood transfusion. Six (60%) cases underwent intrauterine balloon tamponade to decrease the amount of blood loss after CS. One patient required D&C 11 weeks after CS. Three weeks after CS, one (10%) patient developed > 2500 ml of blood loss and required UAE to stop bleeding. Subsequently, the RPOC reduced naturally. Four (17%) of 24 pregnant women with RPOC needed D&C, and 10 (42%) required UAE. Two (8%) of the 24 had hysterectomy for RPOC treatment. Finally, in 13 (54%) pregnant women, RPOC was reduced naturally without D&C, UAE, or hysterectomy treatment. Discussion In this study, we found that pregnant women with placenta previa with RPOC experienced prior CS complicated with major previa, PAS, developed massive intraoperative blood loss, massive postpartum hemorrhage, and massive total blood loss more frequently than those without RPOC did. Multivariate analysis revealed that prior CS and PAS were the risk factors for RPOC in pregnant women with placenta previa. Pregnant women with placenta previa with severe PPH experienced multipara, prior CS, major previa, placenta at the anterior wall, PAS, and RPOC more frequently than pregnant women having placenta previa without severe PPH. In addition, multivariate analysis demonstrated that RPOC was the cause of severe PPH in addition to prior CS and major previa. Many pregnant women with RPOC receive several additional hemostatic treatments. In previous studies, risk factors for RPOC were primipara, uterine atony, placenta accreta spectrum (PAS), history of RPOC, preterm delivery, prolonged oxytocin intake, previous uterine surgeries, and uterine abnormalities [1–5]. This study identified prior CS and PAS as risk factors for RPOC in women with placenta previa. Therefore, our findings partially correspond to previous reports, and we need to pay attention to RPOC in pregnant women with placenta previa who have prior CS and suspicious PAS. In previous studies, the incidence of the development of RPOC was reported to range from 1 to 6% [1–5]. Hence, in this study, there was a possibility that the occurrence rate of RPOC in placenta previa (7.2%) was higher, although a direct comparison is not feasible. This discrepancy was assumed to cause differences in subjects between previous reports and our study. Although previous reports have included women after delivery, abortion, or miscarriage, our study included all pregnant women with placenta previa. Therefore, pregnant women with placenta previa often develop RPOC. The tools for the diagnosis of RPOC were US, CT, and MRI [3, 6, 12–16]. Of these, US is frequently used with a sensitivity and specificity ranging from 66 to 98% and 33 to 89%, respectively [4, 26–28]. CT and MRI are assistive tools to diagnose RPOC, but their sensitivities and specificities are unclear due to the small number of case studies [3, 6]. In our study, some cases could not be diagnosed by US, but were diagnosed with MRI and CT. Therefore, MRI and CT are useful tools for diagnosing RPOC, and it may be valuable that all patients with placenta previa will be performed by CT and MRI to detect RPOC. On the other hand, previous studies revealed that age, prior D&C, prior CS, major previa, and anterior locating placenta were the risk factors for severe PPH in placenta previa [29, 30]. In our study, RPOC was considered a risk factor for severe PPH in pregnant women with placenta previa. Since RPOC might induce massive PPH, diagnosis using MRI or CT may be actively recommended. But few previous studies revealed the sensitivity and the specificity of CT or MRI to diagnose RPOC, and we might miss patients who had RPOC without severe PPH because of a difference of modalities. Further studies are needed to discover an availability of CT and MRI for diagnosis of RPOC in all patients with placenta previa after operation. Most cases of RPOC received no treatment because RPOC disappeared naturally, with its incidence ranging from 55 to 71% [14, 31]. Hence, in the case that patients underwent any treatment, many pregnant women with RPOC received D&C and recovered [31, 32]. However, although the incidence was low, if massive PPH developed, UAE and hysterectomy were performed, and massive blood transfusion was required [12, 31–34]. In this study, many pregnant women with placenta previa with RPOC underwent insertion of uterine balloon tamponade, UAE, hysterectomy, and massive blood transfusion, although there were patients who received no treatment. Therefore, RPOC is a more important factor that causes massive hemorrhage in patients with placenta previa than in those without placenta previa. In previous studies, few patients required UAE or hysterectomy, but this study revealed that more patients with placenta previa required UAE or hysterectomy. Therefore, the clinical significance of RPOC in placenta previa should be recognized. Previous studies showed that insertion of uterine balloon tamponade decreased the intraoperative and postoperative hemorrhage in patients with placenta previa [8, 35]. In this study, patients with placenta previa who received RPOC could benefit insertion of uterine balloon tamponade and it might decrease postpartum hemorrhage. But the number of cases was small. The Further study is needed and we should evaluate a new strategy that we will routinely insert of uterine balloon tamponade in all patients with RPOC in order to decrease postpartum hemorrhage. In our hospital, all patients were performed ultrasound examination after operation within seven days because placental remnants are empirically frequent. All cases who had severe PPH were performed by US within 24 h after operation as a rule of our hospital to search the cause of severe PPH. Therefore, all patients had at least one ultrasound examination performed during stay in our hospital. The present study had some limitations. First, this was a retrospective, single-institutional study and included only a small sample size. Second, we did not perform a literature review or meta-analysis and could not evaluate the further risk factor. Third, patients with severe PPH were decreased because almost all patients had inserted uterine balloon tamponade after operation. Finally, at inclusion criteria in this study, we targeted at only singleton pregnant women with placenta previa who underwent CS and placenta removal during CS. Therefore, patients with PAS who had needed UAE and hysterectomy might be decreased. However, our study demonstrated the clinical significance of RPOC and is useful in clinical settings and future studies. Conclusion Prior CS and PAS are risk factors for RPOC development. In addition, RPOC may be a risk factor for massive PPH in placenta previa. Therefore, the development of a definitive treatment is necessary. Supplementary Information Additional file 1. Supplementary material 1. The details of cases with retained products of conception (RPOC)with severe postpartum hemorrhage in pregnant patients with placenta previa. Additional file 2. Supplementary material 2. The details of cases with retained products of conception (RPOC)without severe postpartum hemorrhage in pregnant patients with placenta previa. Abbreviations RPOC Retained products of conception PPH Postpartum hemorrhage CS Cesarean section PAS Placenta accreta spectrum OR Odds ratio US Ultrasonography MRI Magnetic resonance imaging CT Contrast-enhanced computed tomography UAE Uterine artery embolization D&C Dilation and curettage Acknowledgements We would like to thank Editage (www.editage.jp) for English language editing. Authors’ contributions N Kishimoto: Protocol/project development, Manuscript writing/editing. M Miyamoto: Protocol/project development, Manuscript writing/editing. A Imauji: Data collection and management. M Takada: Data collection and management. S Nishitani: Data collection and management. R Tanabe: Data collection and management. T Ito: Data collection and management. T Hada: Data collection and management. Y Otsuka: Data analysis. M Takano: Protocol/project development, Manuscript writing/editing. Funding This study was conducted without any financial support. Availability of data and materials The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the National Defense Medical College, Tokorozawa, Saitama, Japan, on July 30, 2019 (confirmation no.: 4650). The records and information of all women in the study were anonymized and de-identified prior to analysis. The present study was exempt from obtaining informed consent from all participants by the institutional review board of the National Defense Medical College, Tokorozawa, Japan. All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations or Declaration of Helsinki. Consent for publication Not applicable. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. ==== Refs References 1. Romero R Hsu YC Athanassiadis AP Hagay Z Avila C Nores J Preterm delivery: a risk factor for retained placenta Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990 163 823 825 10.1016/0002-9378(90)91076-O 2403163 2. Hoveyda F MacKenzie IZ Secondary postpartum haemorrhage: incidence, morbidity and current management BJOG 2001 108 927 930 11563461 3. Sellmyer MA Desser TS Maturen KE Jeffrey RB Jr Kamaya A Physiologic, histologic, and imaging features of retained products of conception Radiographics 2013 33 781 796 10.1148/rg.333125177 23674774 4. Van den Bosch T Daemen A Van Schoubroeck D Pochet N De Moor B Timmerman D (2008) Occurrence and outcome of residual trophoblastic tissue: a prospective study J Ultrasound Med 2008 27 357 361 10.7863/jum.2008.27.3.357 18314513 5. Ganer Herman H Kogan Z Tairy D Ben Zvi M Kerner R Ginath S Pregnancies following hysteroscopic removal of retained products of conception after delivery versus abortion Gynecol Obstet Invest 2018 83 586 592 10.1159/000489496 29945122 6. Iraha Y Okada M Toguchi M Azama K Mekaru K Kinjo T Multimodality imaging in secondary postpartum or postabortion hemorrhage: retained products of conception and related conditions Jpn J Radiol 2018 36 12 22 10.1007/s11604-017-0687-y 29052024 7. Abbasi S Jamal A Eslamian L Marsousi V Role of clinical and ultrasound findings in the diagnosis of retained products of conception Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008 32 704 707 10.1002/uog.5391 18792059 8. Soyama H Miyamoto M Ishibashi H Nakatsuka M Kawauchi H Sakamoto T Analysis of prophylactic Bakri balloon tamponade failure in patients with placenta previa Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 2019 58 159 163 10.1016/j.tjog.2018.11.029 30638472 9. van Wessel S Coryn N van Vliet H Schoot B Weyers S Hamerlynck T Reproductive and obstetric outcomes after hysteroscopic removal of retained products of conception J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2020 27 840 846 10.1016/j.jmig.2019.07.016 31352066 10. Jauniaux E Alfirevic Z Bhide AG Belfort MA Burton GJ Collins SL Placenta praevia and placenta accreta: diagnosis and management. BJOG: Int J Obstet Gy: green-top guideline.L BJOG 2019 126 e1 e48 10.1111/1471-0528.15306 30260097 11. Silver RM Branch DW Placenta accreta spectrum N Engl J Med 2018 378 1529 1536 10.1056/NEJMcp1709324 29669225 12. Vyas S Choi HH Whetstone S Jha P Poder L Shum DJ Ultrasound features help identify patients who can undergo noninvasive management for suspected retained products of conception: a single institutional experience Abdom Radiol (NY) 2021 46 2729 2739 10.1007/s00261-020-02948-y 33459841 13. Tanimura K Yamasaki Y Ebina Y Deguchi M Ueno Y Kitajima K Prediction of adherent placenta in pregnancy with placenta previa using ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2015 187 41 44 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2015.02.017 25748486 14. Ou J Peng P Teng L Li C Liu X Management of patients with placenta accreta spectrum disorders who underwent pregnancy terminations in the second trimester: a retrospective study Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2019 242 109 113 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2019.09.014 31580962 15. Groszmann YS Healy Murphy AL Benacerraf BR Diagnosis and management of patients with enhanced myometrial vascularity associated with retained products of conception Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2018 52 396 399 10.1002/uog.18954 29124818 16. Hamel CC van Wessel S Carnegy A Coppus SFPJ Snijders MPML Clark J Diagnostic criteria for retained products of conception-A scoping review Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2021 100 2135 2143 10.1111/aogs.14229 34244998 17. Calì G Giambanco L Puccio G Forlani F Morbidly adherent placenta: evaluation of ultrasound diagnostic criteria and differentiation of placenta accreta from percreta Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013 41 406 412 10.1002/uog.12385 23288834 18. Grönvall M Stefanovic V Paavonen J Loukovaara M Tikkanen M Major or minor placenta previa: does it make a difference? Placenta 2019 15 85 9 14 10.1016/j.placenta.2019.08.080 19. Bahar A Abusham A Eskandar M Sobande A Alsunaidi M Risk factors and pregnancy outcome in different types of placenta previa J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2009 31 2 126 131 10.1016/S1701-2163(16)34096-8 19327211 20. Van Wyck HB Antepartum Haemorrhage Can Med Assoc J 1943 49 504 509 20322946 21. WHO guidelines for the management of postpartum haemorrhage and retained placenta. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/44171. Accessed 04 Nov 2022. 22. Prevention and Management of Postpartum Haemorrhage: Green-top Guideline No. 52. BJOG. 2017;124(5):e106–49. 23. Franke D Zepf J Burkhardt T Stein P Zimmermann R Haslinger C Retained placenta and postpartum hemorrhage: time is not everything Arch Gynecol Obstet 2021 304 903 911 10.1007/s00404-021-06027-5 33743043 24. Liu CN Yu FB Xu YZ Li JS Guan ZH Sun MN Prevalence and risk factors of severe postpartum hemorrhage: a retrospective cohort study BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2021 21 332 10.1186/s12884-021-03818-1 33902475 25. Neary C Naheed S McLernon DJ Black M Predicting risk of postpartum haemorrhage: a systematic review BJOG 2021 128 46 53 10.1111/1471-0528.16379 32575159 26. Durfee SM Frates MC Luong A Benson CB The sonographic and color Doppler features of retained products of conception J Ultrasound Med 2005 24 1181 1186 10.7863/jum.2005.24.9.1181 16123177 27. Matijevic R Knezevic M Grgic O Zlodi-Hrsak L Diagnostic accuracy of sonographic and clinical parameters in the prediction of retained products of conception J Ultrasound Med 2009 28 295 299 10.7863/jum.2009.28.3.295 19244064 28. de Vries JI van der Linden RM van der Linden HC Predictive value of sonographic examination to visualize retained placenta directly after birth at 16 to 28 weeks J Ultrasound Med 2000 19 7 12 10.7863/jum.2000.19.1.7 10625184 29. Kong CW To WWK Risk factors for severe postpartum haemorrhage during caesarean section for placenta praevia J Obstet Gynaecol 2020 40 479 484 10.1080/01443615.2019.1631769 31476931 30. Pivano A Alessandrini M Desbriere R Agostini A Opinel P d’Ercole C A score to predict the risk of emergency caesarean delivery in women with antepartum bleeding and placenta praevia Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2015 195 173 176 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2015.10.015 26550944 31. Kamaya A Krishnarao PM Nayak N Jeffrey RB Maturen KE Clinical and imaging predictors of management in retained products of conception Abdom Radiol (NY) 2016 41 2429 2434 10.1007/s00261-016-0954-x 27853850 32. Takahashi H Ohhashi M Baba Y Nagayama S Ogoyama M Horie K Conservative management of retained products of conception in the normal placental position: a retrospective observational study Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2019 240 87 92 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2019.06.016 31238204 33. Shitanaka S Chigusa Y Kawahara S Kawasaki K Mogami H Mandai M Kondoh E Conservative management for retained products of conception after less than 22 weeks of gestation J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2020 46 10 1982 1987 10.1111/jog.14405 32761752 34. Kimura Y Osuga K Nagai K Hongyo H Tanaka K Ono Y The efficacy of uterine artery embolization with gelatin sponge for retained products of conception with bleeding and future pregnancy outcomes CVIR Endovasc 2020 3 13 10.1186/s42155-020-00107-4 32052234 35. Soyama H Miyamoto M Sasa H Ishibashi H Yoshida M Nakatsuka M Takano M Furuya K Effect of routine rapid insertion of Bakri balloon tamponade on reducing hemorrhage from placenta previa during and after cesarean section Arch Gynecol Obstet 2017 296 3 469 474 10.1007/s00404-017-4446-1 28647816