The Association of High Body Mass Index with the Risk of Placenta Previa: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Placenta previa is a significant cause of maternal and neonatal morbidity, primarily due to antepartum hemorrhage. Concurrently, the global prevalence of maternal obesity is rising, a condition associated with numerous adverse pregnancy outcomes. The direct relationship between high maternal Body Mass Index (BMI) and the risk of developing placenta previa remains contentious, with conflicting evidence from observational studies. This systematic review aims to critically appraise and synthesize the available evidence to clarify this association. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Google Scholar, Semanthic Scholar, Springer, Wiley Online Library was conducted to identify all relevant cohort and case-control studies published in English. Studies were included if they investigated the association between pre-pregnancy or early-pregnancy BMI (categorized as overweight or obese) and the incidence of placenta previa in pregnant women, compared to those with a normal BMI. Two independent reviewers performed study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). A formal risk of bias assessment was also conducted using the Cochrane Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. A narrative synthesis of the findings was performed. Results: Seventeen studies, comprising large-scale retrospective cohorts and case-control studies, met the inclusion criteria. The majority of high-quality studies, particularly those with robust adjustment for confounding variables, found no statistically significant direct association between high maternal BMI and the risk of placenta previa. Unadjusted analyses in some studies suggested a weak association, but this effect was consistently attenuated and lost statistical significance after controlling for key confounders, most notably a history of prior cesarean delivery. Analysis of secondary outcomes revealed that high BMI is strongly associated with an increased risk for primary cesarean delivery, gestational diabetes, and preeclampsia. Discussion: The weight of the evidence suggests that high maternal BMI is not an independent, direct risk factor for placenta previa. The association observed in unadjusted analyses is likely an artifact of confounding. A plausible indirect causal pathway is proposed: high BMI increases the risk of a primary cesarean delivery in a woman's first pregnancy, and the resultant uterine scarring is a powerful, established risk factor for placenta previa in a subsequent pregnancy. The pathophysiological mechanisms of obesity, such as systemic inflammation, appear to drive metabolic and hypertensive complications rather than influencing the specific site of placental implantation. Conclusion: The link between high maternal BMI and placenta previa is indirect, mediated primarily through the increased rate of cesarean delivery. Clinical counseling for women with high BMI should emphasize the well-established risks of gestational diabetes, hypertensive disorders, and the increased likelihood of a primary cesarean section, along with the long-term reproductive consequences of that surgery, including a future risk of placenta previa.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".