Marija Adamovic

Dr. Marija Adamovic


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

3Years (2024-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PPPetra Pateisky
Petra Pateisky
FMFanny Mikula
Fanny Mikula
MAMarija Adamovic
Marija Adamovic
JNJana Neumüller
Jana Neumüller
KCKinga Chalubinski
Kinga Chalubinski
SSStephanie Springer
Stephanie Springer
Background: Retained products of conception after childbirth or miscarriage are associated with an increased rate of maternal complications, such as abnormal vaginal bleeding and infections. Late complications may also include intrauterine adhesions, causing infertility. Surgical interventions carry a certain risk. Thus, conservative management is often discussed as an alternative. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical outcomes of patients with retained products of conception, comparing a primary surgical approach to conservative management. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 88 patients diagnosed with retained products of conception after 23+0 weeks of gestation at the Medical University Vienna between 2014 and 2022. Results: Forty-seven (53.4%) patients underwent primary surgical management and 41 (46.6%) primary conservative management. After primary conservative treatment, a complication could be observed in 10 (24.4%) women. In contrast, complications occurred in 32 (68.1%) women in the group with primary surgical treatment (p < 0.001). The most common complication in both groups was the ongoing suspicion of retained products of conception. Patients after primary surgical treatment were significantly more likely to require a secondary change in treatment (p < 0.001). Ultimately, secondary conservative management was applied in 30 (63.8%) patients. In contrast, only nine (21.95%) patients with primary conservative management required secondary surgical management. Conclusions: Due to the high risk of complications and persistent retained products of conception, primary surgical management should only be prioritized in hemodynamically instable or septic patients.

Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
GYGülen Yerlikaya-Schatten
Gülen Yerlikaya-Schatten
MAMarija Adamovic
Marija Adamovic
ACAnja Catic
Anja Catic
KHKitana Hendling
Kitana Hendling
VSVivien Sauer
Vivien Sauer
TRTheresa Reischer
Theresa Reischer
Objective: To investigate whether gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), including insulin-treated GDM, affects cerebroplacental ratio (CPR) values in monochorionic diamniotic (MCDA) twin pregnancies. Methods: This retrospective single-center cohort study included a total of 262 MCDA twin pregnancies managed at a tertiary referral center, comprising pregnancies without GDM (n = 120), with diet-controlled GDM (n = 80), and with insulin-treated GDM (n = 62). Doppler ultrasound examinations were performed at three gestational time points between 24 and 36 weeks of gestation. CPR, umbilical artery pulsatility index (UA-PI), and middle cerebral artery pulsatility index (MCA-PI) were compared longitudinally between groups. Doppler indices were compared between groups without adjustment for baseline differences such as BMI and parity Results: Maternal body mass index was significantly higher in pregnancies complicated by GDM, particularly in those requiring insulin therapy (p < 0.001). Estimated fetal weight was higher in the insulin-treated GDM group at mid-gestation (28–32 weeks; p = 0.01). However, CPR values remained within normal ranges throughout all screening points across all three groups. No relevant differences in UA-PI, MCA-PI, gestational age at delivery, Apgar scores, or umbilical cord pH were observed between groups. Conclusions: In MCDA twin pregnancies, gestational diabetes—regardless of insulin treatment—does not appear to significantly influence cerebroplacental ratio values throughout gestation. No statistically significant differences in CPR values were observed between groups. No statistically significant differences in CPR values were detected between groups. However, given the exploratory design and lack of adjustment for confounders, subtle effects cannot be excluded. The clinical utility of CPR in this population requires further investigation.