目的 探讨非前壁胎盘植入与前壁胎盘植入的产前诊断及围产结局。 方法 回顾分析在广州医科大学附属第三医院诊断胎盘植入并分娩的560例孕妇，根据胎盘位置的不同分为非前壁胎盘植入组（241例）和前壁胎盘植入组（319例），分析两组孕妇的一般特征及母婴结局。再将非前壁胎盘植入组241例孕妇根据明确诊断时间进行分组，术中或术后首次发现胎盘植入者为产时诊断组（漏诊）（70例），分娩前诊断胎盘植入者为产前诊断组（171例），分析两组孕妇的一般特征及母婴结局。 结果 非前壁胎盘植入组与前壁胎盘植入组的产次、剖宫产史、分娩方式、植入程度、漏诊率、新生儿出生体质量、子宫切除率差异有统计学意义（P < 0.05）。不同胎盘植入程度的产前诊断情况中，非前壁胎盘植入组的胎盘粘连产前诊断率低于前壁胎盘植入组，差异有统计学意义（P < 0.05）。非前壁胎盘植入组中产时诊断组与产前诊断组的年龄、剖宫产史、胎盘前置状态、分娩方式、植入程度、24 h出血量、输血例数、转NICU率、子宫丢失率，差异有统计学意义（P < 0.05）。 结论 非前壁胎盘植入者的高危因素构成与前壁胎盘植入者不同，多产、剖宫产史是发生前壁胎盘植入的高危因素，非前壁胎盘植入更容易发生漏诊，其中以胎盘粘连为主，漏诊的非前壁胎盘植入孕妇不良分娩结局率高，其中新生儿转NICU率更为突出。

Objective To investigate the prenatal diagnosis and perinatal outcomes between anterior placenta accreta and non-anterior placenta. Methods A retrospective analysis was done for 560 pregnant women who were diagnosed with placenta accreta and delivered in the Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University.According to the location of the placenta， the group was dividing into anterior placenta accreta group （319 cases） and non-anterior placenta accreta group （241 cases）. The general characteristics， maternal and infant outcomes of the two groups were analyzed. The non-anterior placenta accrete group （241 cases） then were dividing into two groups according to the time of clear diagnosis. Those who were firstly diagnosed with placenta accrete during or after the operation was the intrapartum diagnosis group （missed diagnosis） （70 cases）， and those who were diagnosed with clear placenta accreta before the delivery was prenatal diagnosis group （171 cases）. The general characteristics， maternal and infant outcomes of the two groups were also analyzed. Results There were statistically significant differences in the parity， history of cesarean section， delivery mode， degree of placenta accreta， missed diagnosis rate， neonatal birth weight， and hysterectomy rate between the non-anterior placenta accrete group and the anterior placenta accreta group. In the case of prenatal diagnosis of different degrees of placenta accreta， the prenatal diagnosis rate of placental adhesion in the non-anterior placenta accreta group was lower than that of the anterior placenta accreta group， which was statistically significant. In the non-anterior placenta accrete group， there were statistically significant differences in the age， cesarean section history， placenta previa status， mode of delivery， degree of implantation， 24-hour bleeding volume， blood transfusions， NICU transfer rate， uterine loss rate between the intrapartum diagnosis group （missed diagnosis） and the prenatal diagnosis group. Conclusions The high-risk factors of patients with non-anterior placenta accreta are different from those of patients with anterior placenta accreta. Multiple births and a history of cesarean section are high-risk factors for anterior placenta accreta patients. Non-anterior placenta accreta are more likely to be missed diagnosed， especially the placental adhesion. For pregnant women with non-anterior placenta accreta missed diagnosis， there is a high rate of adverse birth outcomes， especially in the rate of neonatal transfer to the NICU.