Key Takeaways
- No official “Centers of Excellence” list exists — use case volume, multidisciplinary team composition, and published outcomes to evaluate hospitals
- ACOG recommends delivery at Level III or higher maternal care facilities with PAS experience
- In Cincinnati, UC Medical Center (Level IV) is the strongest option; for severe cases, consider traveling to a dedicated PAS program
- This ranking prioritizes hospitals with documented fertility preservation capability — the site’s primary audience is patients seeking uterine-sparing options
Why Hospital Choice Matters
If there is one thing the research makes overwhelmingly clear, it is this: where you deliver matters enormously. Outcomes for patients with Placenta Accreta Spectrum are dramatically better at experienced, high-volume centers with dedicated multidisciplinary teams compared to hospitals that encounter PAS only occasionally.
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) recommends that patients with suspected PAS deliver at a Level III or Level IV maternity center — facilities equipped with maternal-fetal medicine specialists, specialized surgical teams, robust blood bank services, adult and neonatal intensive care, and interventional radiology capabilities.
Case volume matters. Studies consistently show that hospitals managing a higher number of PAS cases per year achieve significantly lower rates of hemorrhage, ICU admission, and surgical complications. A center that sees dozens of PAS cases per year will have refined protocols, experienced surgeons, and well-practiced coordination across specialties — advantages that are difficult to replicate at lower-volume institutions.
There is no single official “list” of PAS Centers of Excellence recognized by ACOG, SMFM, or any national accrediting body. The hospitals highlighted below have been identified through published research, clinical reputation, named PAS programs, case volume data, and expert recognition. This guide is meant to help you start your search — not to replace direct evaluation of a center's capabilities for your specific situation.
Top 3 Hospitals in Cincinnati, OH
For patients in the Greater Cincinnati area, these are the most relevant institutions for PAS care, ranked by their level of specialization and evidence of dedicated PAS expertise.
No Cincinnati-area hospital currently offers documented fertility-preserving (uterine-sparing) surgery for PAS. The regional focus is on optimized cesarean hysterectomy and excellent prenatal diagnosis. If preserving your uterus is a priority, you will likely need to travel to a national referral center such as UTHealth Houston, University of Utah, Brigham and Women’s, or Penn Medicine — all of which accept out-of-state referrals and offer telehealth consultations.
University of Cincinnati Medical Center (UC Health)
- First and only Level IV maternity hospital in Greater Cincinnati — the highest designation available
- 8 full-time Maternal-Fetal Medicine (MFM) faculty, 2 advanced practice nurses, and 3 MFM fellows
- Dedicated multidisciplinary prenatal PAS evaluation clinic with coordinated surgical planning
- OB anesthesia team participates directly in preoperative PAS evaluation — a hallmark of best-practice PAS care
- Contact: 513-584-LADY (5239) | MFM referrals: 513-475-8588
Source: uchealth.com
TriHealth Good Samaritan / Cincinnati Children’s Fetal Care Center
- Three-institution collaboration between TriHealth, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital, and the University of Cincinnati
- Evaluated 8,000+ high-risk pregnancies since 2004 through the Fetal Care Center
- Advanced Obstetrical Care Unit with specialized monitoring capabilities
- No dedicated PAS-specific program has been identified in public-facing materials; however, high-risk obstetric expertise is well-established
The Christ Hospital
- Maternal-Fetal Medicine services with experienced MFM specialists
- Level III NICU for neonatal intensive care
- No evidence of a dedicated PAS program has been found in available literature or public-facing information
- For cases of severe PAS (especially percreta), transfer to UC Medical Center is recommended given their Level IV designation and dedicated PAS evaluation clinic
For Cincinnati patients with severe PAS (especially percreta), consider also consulting with dedicated PAS programs at Cleveland Clinic, University of Michigan, or traveling to University of Utah or Baylor/Texas Children’s — all of which have named, high-volume PAS programs with published outcomes data. For fertility-preserving options specifically, also consider UTHealth Houston and Penn Medicine.
Fertility Preservation Centers Map
This interactive map shows the location of PAS hospitals that offer or are developing fertility-preserving care. Green markers indicate confirmed fertility-preservation programs and amber markers indicate emerging capability. Hover over a marker for details; click to visit the hospital profile.
Top 10 Hospitals in the United States
The following institutions are ranked with a focus on fertility preservation capability — the most important factor for patients seeking to preserve their uterus. Rankings weigh published uterine-preservation outcomes, active clinical trials, and documented conservative management programs alongside overall PAS expertise and case volume.
University of Utah Health
- Program Director: Dr. Brett Einerson
- 132 patients in 3 years — among the highest case volumes of any dedicated PAS program in the United States
- National leader in uterine-sparing (fertility-preserving) treatments
- NICHD-funded research on conservative management approaches for PAS
- Named, dedicated program with published outcomes and active clinical trials
UTHealth Houston / UT Physicians
- Medical Director: Dr. Farah Amro, MD
- Published the largest US case series on uterine preservation for PAS — 180 patients (2015–2024), with 29 planned for uterine preservation and 13 (45%) successful17
- Five patients subsequently had healthy pregnancies without PAS recurrence
- Patients with successful preservation had lower blood loss (700 mL vs. 1,950 mL) and fewer transfusions
- Described in publication as “the only study of its kind evaluating uterine preservation for PAS in the United States”
Brigham and Women’s Hospital
- Program lead: Dr. Daniela Carusi
- Abnormal Placentation Program established in 2008 — one of the longest-running dedicated PAS programs in the US
- Hybrid operating room with integrated interventional radiology capability
- Routine use of cell salvage (intraoperative blood recovery) to minimize transfusion needs
Penn Medicine / University of Pennsylvania
- Director: Dr. Beth L. Pineles, MD, PhD
- Running U-PRESERVE trial (NCT06512181) — a pilot study evaluating conservative management (leaving placenta in situ) for patients desiring uterine preservation
- Dr. Pineles trained at UTHealth Houston, gaining direct experience with the leaving-in-situ approach before establishing the Penn program
- Published in AJOG MFM: “Is conservative management of PAS practical in the United States?” — advocating that conservative management should be offered for fertility preservation18
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC)
- Director: Dr. Scott Shainker, DO, MSc (Harvard Medical School faculty)
- The New England Center for Placental Disorders (NECPD) is described as an internationally recognized multidisciplinary program and international referral center
- Co-authored landmark AJOG 2025 meta-analysis showing conservative management associated with 974 mL less blood loss vs. cesarean hysterectomy19
- Published advocate for conservative management as a fertility-preserving alternative to hysterectomy
Baylor College of Medicine / Texas Children’s Hospital
- Program Leaders: Dr. Michael Belfort & Dr. Alireza Shamshirsaz
- 243 PAS patients between 2011–2018 — one of the largest published case series in the world
- Published 147-patient AJOG 2023 study documenting fertility preservation outcomes21
- 24/7 emergency response capability with Level IV NICU
- Pioneering machine learning PAS prediction research using imaging and clinical data
- Comprehensive multidisciplinary team with dedicated PAS surgical protocol
Columbia University / NewYork-Presbyterian
- Co-directors: Dr. Fady Khoury-Collado, MD (gynecologic oncologist) and Dr. Leslie Moroz, MD
- Dr. Khoury-Collado has performed 100+ PAS surgeries and is developing techniques to retain the uterus and remove only the placenta
- Multidisciplinary PAS team since 2018
- No published case series with uterine preservation outcomes yet — techniques are in active development
UTMB Galveston
- Medical Director: Dr. Karin Fox, MD, MEd (Professor of MFM; board member, IS-PAS and PAS²)
- Co-authored “Opportunities for, and barriers to, uterus-preserving surgical techniques for PAS” (Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 2024) — a key publication advancing the field
- Dr. Fox is one of the most prolific PAS researchers internationally, previously at Baylor/Texas Children’s
- No UTMB-specific published uterine preservation outcomes yet — program is being established
- Key specialists: Dr. Rebecca Jessel and Dr. Fady Khoury Collado
- Dedicated PAS program with structured multidisciplinary planning for each patient
- Unique gynecologic oncology partnership providing advanced surgical expertise for complex cases involving deep tissue invasion
- Program for Advanced Surgical Obstetrics — a named program specifically addressing complex placental disorders
- Dedicated nurse coordinator assigned to each PAS patient for continuity of care and communication throughout the pregnancy
- “Planning-first” approach emphasizing thorough preoperative assessment and individualized surgical strategy before delivery
Fertility Preservation Comparison
For patients who want to preserve their uterus and future fertility, this is one of the most important factors in choosing a hospital. Not all top PAS centers offer fertility-preserving approaches — many focus exclusively on optimizing cesarean hysterectomy outcomes.
If preserving your fertility is a priority, ask specifically whether the hospital offers uterine-sparing surgery and what their published outcomes are. A hospital being “top-ranked” for PAS care does not automatically mean they offer conservative management.
| Hospital | Fertility Preservation | Details |
|---|---|---|
| 1. University of Utah | ✅ YES — National Leader | ~80% avoid hysterectomy; NICHD-funded conservative management research; only federally funded fertility-preserving PAS study in the US |
| 2. UTHealth Houston | ✅ YES — Largest US Case Series | 180 patients (2015–2024); 29 planned for uterine preservation, 13 (45%) successful; 5 subsequent healthy pregnancies |
| 3. Brigham and Women’s | ✅ YES | Explicitly offers individualized conservative approaches; risk-stratified care model; 25–35% recurrence rate in subsequent pregnancies |
| 4. Penn Medicine | ✅ YES — Active Clinical Trial | U-PRESERVE trial (NCT06512181); conservative management (leaving placenta in situ); director trained at UTHealth Houston |
| 5. BIDMC / NECPD | ✅ YES — Established Program | New England Center for Placental Disorders; 2025 meta-analysis: conservative management = 974 mL less blood loss vs. hysterectomy |
| 6. Baylor / Texas Children’s | ✅ YES — Published Outcomes | 147-patient AJOG 2023 study on combined surgical approach; Strategy A with published fertility preservation outcomes |
| 7. Columbia / NYP | ⚠️ Emerging | 100+ PAS surgeries; developing techniques to retain uterus and remove only the placenta; no published case series yet |
| 8. UTMB Galveston | ⚠️ Research Leader | Co-authored key 2024 publication on uterus-preserving surgical techniques; Dr. Karin Fox is IS-PAS and PAS² board member |
| 9. NYU Langone | ⚠️ Stated Goal | Publicly stated intent to pursue uterine preservation research; program newly formalized (~2024); no published outcomes yet |
| 10. Cleveland Clinic | ⚠️ Case-by-Case | Patient materials state “may be able to prevent hysterectomy”; no published protocol or outcomes |
| Other Notable Centers (hysterectomy-focused) | ||
| Johns Hopkins | ❌ Not Confirmed | Focus is on optimized cesarean hysterectomy with CT angiography; no published conservative management data |
| Duke | ❌ Not Confirmed | P-UAE + delayed hysterectomy reduces morbidity but endpoint is still hysterectomy; published systematic review on topic |
| Mass General | ❌ Not Confirmed | Strong basic science research; clinical fertility preservation not documented in public materials |
| UCSF (MAPS) | ❌ Not a Focus | MAPS protocol built around cesarean hysterectomy; published outcomes are hysterectomy-only |
| University of Michigan | ❌ Not a Focus | Patient education describes “Cesarean Hysterectomy”; REBOA innovation focused on hysterectomy safety |
Click any hospital name above to view their full profile page with detailed physician information, outcomes data, and contact details.
Other Notable PAS Centers
The following institutions are excellent PAS programs with strong outcomes — but their primary approach is optimized cesarean hysterectomy rather than fertility preservation. If you are NOT seeking fertility preservation, these centers offer world-class PAS surgical care.
These programs do not offer documented fertility preservation for PAS. If preserving your uterus is a priority, focus on the Top 10 hospitals above.
- Key specialists: Dr. Arthur Jason Vaught and Dr. Torre Halscott
- Monthly PAS multidisciplinary conference for case planning and review
- Exceptionally low ICU admission rate among PAS patients — reflecting superior perioperative management
- Dual-board certified specialists in both MFM and critical care
- Program lead: Dr. Jennifer Gilner (since 2016)
- Transfusion rate of 14.8% compared to the national average of 46.9% — dramatically superior blood management outcomes
- Member of the PAS2 board of directors (national PAS research consortium)
- Data-driven approach with published outcomes that rank among the best in the nation
- Consistently named to U.S. News & World Report Best Hospitals Honor Roll
- Participates in COMPASS surgical data transparency initiative — publicly reporting surgical outcomes
- Comprehensive MFM services with access to the full resources of Mass General Brigham system
UCSF Health — MAPS Program
- MAPS (Multidisciplinary Approach to the Placenta Service) — a named, dedicated PAS program
- Part of the UC Fetal Consortium PAS Working Group, a collaboration across 5 University of California institutions
- Access to the full academic medical center resources of UCSF, including research and clinical trial opportunities
- Named Placenta Accreta Spectrum Program with a dedicated multidisciplinary team
- Utilizes REBOA (Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta) technology for hemorrhage control — a cutting-edge approach to managing massive bleeding
- 6 named specialists across MFM, gynecologic oncology, interventional radiology, and anesthesiology
International Hospitals & Research Centers
PAS care has advanced significantly thanks to international collaboration. Many of the most important innovations in fertility-preserving surgery originated outside the United States. The following institutions represent the global frontier of PAS research, innovation, and clinical excellence, organized by country.
The International Network of Obstetric Survey Systems (INOSS) connects researchers across 17 countries to study rare obstetric conditions including PAS. Through INOSS, population-level data from multiple nations can be pooled to study PAS incidence, risk factors, management patterns, and outcomes at a scale no single institution could achieve.
France — Pioneer of Leaving Placenta In Situ
France is the global leader in conservative management of PAS — the approach that aims to preserve the uterus and future fertility by leaving the placenta in place when surgical removal would carry excessive risk. French institutions have produced the most significant population-level data on PAS outcomes and have shaped international guidelines.
CHU de Bordeaux
- Lead Physician: Prof. Loïc Sentilhes
- Led the PACCRETA study (176 hospitals, 520,114 deliveries) — the landmark prospective population-based PAS study
- 86 conservative management cases: only 16.3% needed >4 unit transfusion vs. 59% in the hysterectomy group22
- 88.9% subsequent pregnancy rate after conservative treatment
- Co-author of the FIGO consensus guidelines on PAS management
PMID: 34914894
Hôpital Armand Trousseau (AP-HP)
- Lead Physician: Prof. Gilles Kayem
- Co-PI of PACCRETA study — designed and led the first prospective, population-based study of PAS outcomes
- Approximately 78% uterine preservation rate in conservatively managed cases
- Published comparative data: France vs. UK management showing significantly different conservative management rates
United Kingdom
St George’s University Hospitals
- Key Physicians: Pinas-Carrillo, Bhide, Thilaganathan
- 50 patients, 100% uterine preservation, 0 hysterectomies — one of the most remarkable published outcomes in PAS surgery23
- Uses the Triple-P Procedure: perioperative placental localization, pelvic devascularization, and placental non-separation with myometrial excision and reconstruction
PMID: 31593302
University College London Hospital (UCLH)
- Lead Physician: Prof. Eric Jauniaux — one of the most published PAS researchers in the world
- 480+ peer-reviewed publications on placental disorders
- Inventor of the Triple-P Procedure — the surgical technique now used at multiple international centers
- Developed the RCOG Green-top Guideline 27 on placenta praevia and accreta
- Key contributor to the FIGO classification system for PAS
King’s College Hospital
- Led by Dr. Devi Subramanian
- NHS England specialist commissioned regional PAS service — designated by the national health system as a specialist referral center for PAS in the South of England
- Home to the Fetal Medicine Research Institute — one of the world’s leading fetal medicine research centers
Argentina — Pioneer of One-Step Conservative Surgery
CEMIC / CYMSA Buenos Aires
- Lead Physician: Dr. Jose M. Palacios-Jaraquemada — pioneer of one-step conservative surgery for PAS
- 326 confirmed PAS cases, approximately 80% avoided hysterectomy24
- Preservation rates by type: Type 1: 81.5%, Type 2: 47.7%, Type 3: 21.8%
- Published the first-ever randomized controlled trial (RCT) of one-step conservative surgery vs. hysterectomy (2024): 85.3% conservative surgery possible25
- One of the longest-running fertility-preservation programs globally, with over two decades of experience
Vietnam
Tu Du Hospital
- Key Researchers: Vuong et al.
- 217 cases, 88.9% uterine preservation — one of the highest-volume PAS centers globally26
- Developed the MOSCUS technique (Modified One-Step Conservative Uterine Surgery)
- One of the highest-volume single-institution PAS centers in the world
PMID: 38009657
China
First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University
- 883 patients undergoing conservative surgery (2011–2019) — the largest single-institution published series in the world27
- Uses a modified Triple-P technique adapted for their high-volume setting
- Provides crucial data on conservative management outcomes at a scale unmatched elsewhere
PMID: 37832645
Egypt
Tanta University Hospitals
- Key Researcher: Shehata
- 91 cases, 94.5% uterine preservation using a three-step surgical technique28
- Three-step approach includes: vascular control, placental removal, and myometrial reconstruction
PMID: 30316906
Israel
Hadassah-Hebrew University Medical Center
- 134 women managed conservatively — one of the largest conservative management cohorts outside France
- Approximately 60% fully successful conservative management outcomes
- Long-term follow-up demonstrates fertility not affected long-term in successfully managed patients
Japan
Mie University Hospital
- Developed the TURIP technique (Transverse Uterine-Repair Incision of the Placenta) for conservative PAS surgery29
- Small series with 100% uterine preservation
- Novel technique contribution to the growing global toolkit for fertility-preserving PAS surgery
PMID: 37254306
Singapore
National University Hospital
- 10 conservative vs. 10 hysterectomy — matched comparison study30
- 100% uterine preservation in the conservative surgery group
- Demonstrates feasibility of conservative approach even in smaller-volume settings with rigorous case selection
PMID: 36641463
Global Management Statistics
Management approaches for PAS vary dramatically by country and region. The following table summarizes published hysterectomy and conservative management rates from key national studies, illustrating the wide variation in treatment philosophy worldwide.
| Country | Hysterectomy Rate | Conservative Rate | Key Study |
|---|---|---|---|
| United States | ~70% | ~30% | Silver MFMU 2015 |
| France | ~26% | ~58% in situ | PACCRETA 2022 |
| United Kingdom | ~43% | ~19% preserving | Kayem UK vs France 2022 |
| Argentina | ~20–30% | ~70–80% preservation | Palacios-Jaraquemada 2022 |
| Italy | ~100% (percreta) | 0% | INOSS 2025 |
Direct comparison between countries is difficult because of differences in PAS classification, case severity mix, healthcare systems, and study methodologies. However, the general trend is clear: countries where conservative management is systematically offered have significantly lower hysterectomy rates. This does not mean conservative management is always superior — patient selection, surgical expertise, and follow-up protocols are critical factors.
How to Choose a Hospital
Choosing the right hospital for your PAS delivery is one of the most impactful decisions you can make. Here is a framework to guide your evaluation.
Questions to Ask Your Potential Care Team
- How many PAS cases does this hospital manage per year? Higher volume generally correlates with better outcomes.
- Is there a dedicated PAS or abnormal placentation program? Named, dedicated programs tend to have more refined protocols.
- Who will be on my surgical team? Look for a multidisciplinary team (MDT) that includes MFM, gynecologic oncology or experienced pelvic surgeons, anesthesiology, interventional radiology, neonatology, urology, and a blood bank coordinator.
- What is your transfusion rate for PAS cases? Lower transfusion rates can indicate superior surgical technique and planning.
- Do you use cell salvage (intraoperative blood recovery)? This technique can significantly reduce the need for donor blood transfusions.
- What level NICU do you have? Level III or IV NICUs are preferred, especially for planned preterm deliveries.
- Do you offer fertility-preserving approaches? If future fertility is important to you, ask about conservative management options and the team’s experience with them.
- Can I see published outcomes data? Centers with transparent, published outcomes demonstrate confidence in their results and commitment to quality improvement.
- What happens in an emergency? Ask about rapid-response protocols, operating room availability, and massive transfusion protocols.
- Will the same team manage my entire care? Continuity of care from diagnosis through delivery and recovery is a hallmark of excellent PAS programs.
What to Look For
The National Accreta Foundation maintains a hospital guide and patient resources that can help you identify PAS-experienced centers near you. Visit preventaccreta.org for their latest hospital directory, patient support programs, and educational materials.
References
References
- American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Obstetric Care Consensus No. 7: Placenta Accreta Spectrum. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;132(6):e259–e275. acog.org
- Jauniaux E, Bunce C, Grônbeck L, Langhoff-Roos J. Prevalence and main outcomes of placenta accreta spectrum: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019;221(3):208–218.
- Einerson BD, et al. Placenta accreta spectrum disorder: uterine dehiscence, not placental invasion. Obstet Gynecol. 2021;137(6):1029–1036.
- Fox KA, et al. Placenta accreta spectrum: pathophysiology and evidence-based anatomy for prenatal ultrasound imaging. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020;222(5):e1–e14.
- Sentilhes L, Kayem G, et al. Conservative management of placenta accreta spectrum. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2018;61(4):719–731.
- Kayem G, Seco A, et al. PACCRETA: Clinical situations at high risk of placenta accreta/invasive placenta — a population-based study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2019;98(8):1063–1073.
- Jauniaux E, Grônbeck L, Bunce C, et al. Epidemiology of placenta previa accreta: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2019;9(11):e031193.
- Gilner JB, et al. Multidisciplinary team approach for placenta accreta spectrum: outcomes from a single institution. Am J Perinatol. 2020;37(14):1464–1470.
- Carusi DA. The Placenta Accreta Spectrum: Epidemiology and Risk Factors. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2018;61(4):733–742.
- Silver RM, Branch DW. Placenta Accreta Spectrum. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(16):1529–1536.
- FIGO Safe Motherhood and Newborn Health Committee. FIGO consensus guidelines on placenta accreta spectrum disorders. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2018;140(3):281–298.
- National Accreta Foundation. Hospital Guide and Resources. preventaccreta.org
- UC Health. Level IV Maternity Services — University of Cincinnati Medical Center. uchealth.com
- RCOG Green-top Guideline No. 27a: Placenta Praevia and Placenta Accreta: Diagnosis and Management. rcog.org.uk
- Collins SL, et al. Proposal for standardized ultrasound descriptors of abnormally invasive placenta (AIP). Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016;47(3):271–275.
- International Network of Obstetric Survey Systems (INOSS). npeu.ox.ac.uk/inoss
- Amro F, et al. Leaving Placenta In Situ for Management of Placenta Accreta Spectrum Disorder. Obstet Gynecol. 2025;145(6). PMID: 40273455
- Pineles BL, et al. Is conservative management of placenta accreta spectrum practical in the United States? AJOG MFM. 2023. PMID: 36113717
- Shainker SA, et al. Conservative management versus cesarean hysterectomy for placenta accreta spectrum: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2025. PMID: 39217925
- Fox KA, et al. Opportunities for, and barriers to, uterus-preserving surgical techniques for placenta accreta spectrum. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2024. PMID: 38695676
- Shamshirsaz AA, Belfort MA, et al. Fertility preservation in patients with placenta accreta spectrum disorder: a combined surgical approach. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2023. 147-patient series.
- Sentilhes L, Kayem G, et al. Conservative management of placenta accreta spectrum in the PACCRETA prospective study: 86 conservative cases with outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022. PMID: 34914894
- Pinas-Carrillo A, Bhide A, Thilaganathan B. Triple-P procedure for placenta accreta spectrum: 50 consecutive cases with 100% uterine preservation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019. PMID: 31593302
- Palacios-Jaraquemada JM. One-step conservative surgery for placenta accreta spectrum: resective-reconstructive approach in 326 confirmed cases. BJOG. 2020. PMID: 31984808
- Palacios-Jaraquemada JM, et al. First randomized controlled trial of one-step conservative surgery vs. hysterectomy for placenta accreta spectrum: 85.3% conservative surgery possible. 2024. PMID: 38458362
- Vuong NL, et al. Modified one-step conservative uterine surgery (MOSCUS) for placenta accreta spectrum: 217 cases with 88.9% uterine preservation. 2023. PMID: 38009657
- First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University. Modified Triple-P procedure for placenta accreta spectrum: 883 patients (2011–2019). 2023. PMID: 37832645
- Shehata A. Three-step technique for conservative management of placenta accreta spectrum: 91 cases with 94.5% uterine preservation. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2018. PMID: 30316906
- Mie University Hospital. TURIP technique for conservative surgery in placenta accreta spectrum. 2023. PMID: 37254306
- National University Hospital Singapore. Conservative surgery vs. hysterectomy for placenta accreta spectrum: matched comparison of 10 vs. 10 cases. 2023. PMID: 36641463