RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To identify factors associated with neonatal respiratory distress (NRD) in early Gestational diabetes mellitus (eGDM). DESIGN: Nested case-control analysis of the TOBOGM trial. SETTING: Seventeen hospitals: Australia, Sweden, Austria and India. POPULATION: Pregnant women, <20 weeks' gestation, singleton, GDM risk factors. METHODS: Women with GDM risk factors completed an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) before 20 weeks: those with eGDM (WHO-2013 criteria) were randomised to immediate or deferred GDM treatment. Logistic regression compared pregnancies with/without NRD, and in pregnancies with NRD, those with/without high-dependency nursery admission for ≤24 h with those admitted for >24 h. Comparisons were adjusted for age, pre-pregnancy body mass index, ethnicity, smoking, primigravity, education and site. Adjusted odds ratios (95% CI) are reported. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: NRD definition: ≥4 h of respiratory support (supplemental oxygen or supported ventilation) postpartum. Respiratory distress syndrome (RDS): Supported ventilation and ≥24 h nursery stay. RESULTS: Ninety-nine (12.5%) of 793 infants had NRD; incidence halved (0.50, 0.31-0.79) if GDM treatment was started early. NRD was associated with Caesarean section (2.31, 1.42-3.76), large for gestational age (LGA) (1.83, 1.09-3.08) and shorter gestation (0.95, 0.93-0.97 per day longer). Among NRD infants, >24 h nursery-stay was associated with higher OGTT 1-h glucose (1.38, 1.08-1.76 per mmol/L). Fifteen (2.0%) infants had RDS. CONCLUSIONS: Identifying and treating eGDM reduces NRD risk. NRD is more likely with Caesarean section, LGA and shorter gestation. Further studies are needed to understand the mechanisms behind this eGDM complication and any long-term effects.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Screening for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is important to improve pregnancy outcomes and to prevent type 2 diabetes after pregnancy. Due to a lack of evidence, the 2019 Flemish consensus did not recommend screening for GDM in early pregnancy. Recently, a large randomized controlled trial (TOBOGM) demonstrated that screening for GDM before 20 weeks reduces the risk of neonatal complications in women with risk factors when using higher cut-offs to define GDM compared to the criteria used later in pregnancy. METHODS: Based on this new evidence, members of the Diabetes Liga, the Flemish associations of general physicians (Domus Medica), obstetricians (VVOG), midwives (VBOV), diabetes nurse educators (BVVDV), dieticians (VBVD) and clinical chemists (RBSLM) have adapted the Flemish consensus on screening for GDM. BACKGROUND: Recommendations: As in 2019, this new consensus recommends universal screening for overt diabetes in early pregnancy preferably by measuring fasting plasma glucose by using the same diagnostic criteria as in the non-pregnant state. Based on the new evidence, women with fasting plasma glucose 95-125 mg/dL (5.3-6.9 mmol/L) before 20 weeks gestation should be diagnosed as early GDM. In addition, in women with obesity and/or a history of GDM, it is advised to perform already a 75 g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) between 6 and 20 weeks gestation using higher cut-offs to diagnose early GDM [fasting ≥95 mg/dL (5.3 mmol/L), 1 hour ≥ 19 mg/dL (10.6 mmol/L) and/or 2 hour ≥ 162 mg/dL (9.0 mmol/L))]. The recommendation concerning screening for GDM between 24 and 28 weeks remains unchanged with a diagnosis of GDM based on the 75 g OGTT and IADPSG criteria [fasting ≥ 92 mg/dL (5.1 mmol/L), 1 hour ≥ 180 mg/dL (10.0 mmol/L) and/or 2 hour ≥ 153 mg/dL (8.5 mmol/L)].

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

AIM: To evaluate the differences in the continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS) profiles of women in early pregnancy stratified based on different HbA1c levels known to be predictive of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) at 24-28 weeks of gestation (≥ 5.2%) and adverse pregnancy outcomes (≥ 5.5%) in Indian women. METHODS: We enrolled women at 8+ 0 to 19+ 6 weeks of gestation (early pregnancy), evaluated the glycaemic parameters of clinical interest using CGMS, and reported them per standard methodology proposed by Hernandez et al. WHO 2013 criteria were used for diagnosis of early GDM. RESULTS: Ninety-six women were enrolled at 14.0 ± 3.2 weeks of gestation. Of these, 38 were found to have early GDM (diagnosed before 20 weeks of gestation) on evaluation. Of 96 women, 33 (34.4%) had HbA1c value ≥ 5.5% [11 (19.0%) with normoglycaemia and 22 (57.9%) with GDM]. The women with elevated HbA1c differed significantly from those with HbA1c < 5.5% for all evaluated parameters. The differences for overall women were > 10 mg/dl (0.56 mmol/l) for 1-h postprandial glucose (difference of 0.78 mmol/l), 2-h postprandial glucose (difference of 0.59 mmol/l), peak postprandial glucose (difference of 0.75 mmol/l), and 1-h postprandial glucose excursion (difference of 0.59 mmol/l). Of 58 women with normoglycaemia, 29 (50.0%) had an HbA1c value ≥ 5.2%. In comparison, in the normoglycaemic group of women with and without HbA1c ≥ 5.2% (known to be predictive of future GDM), the results were significant for 1-h (difference of 0.44 mmol/l), 2-h (difference of 0.278 mmol/l), and peak postprandial glucose (difference of 0.35 mmol/l). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that women with elevated HbA1c (≥ 5.5%) in early pregnancy significantly differ from those with HbA1c < 5.5% in all glycaemic parameters evaluated in this study, suggesting that HbA1c at this cut-off has a role to play in early pregnancy.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the study was to evaluate the differences in the continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS)-based glycemic parameters between women with normoglycemia and early gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) identified on the basis of mild fasting plasma glucose elevation (FPG, 5.1-5.5 mmol/L) and/or post-load plasma glucose elevation (PLG, 1-h ≥ 10.0 mmol/L or 2-h ≥ 8.5 mmol/L). METHODS: This cross-sectional study included women with singleton pregnancy (8+0 to 19+6 weeks of gestation) and normoglycemia or GDM per World Health Organization (WHO) 2013 criteria. We evaluated the glycemic parameters of clinical interest using blinded CGMS evaluation and reported them per standard methodology proposed by Hernandez et al. RESULTS: A total of 87 women (GDM, n = 38) were enrolled at 28.6 ± 4.5 years. Among women with GDM, 10 (26.3%) had isolated mild FPG elevation (5.1-5.5 mmol/L), 10 (26.3%) had isolated PLG elevation (1-h ≥ 10.0 mmol/L or 2-h ≥ 8.5 mmol/L), and 7 (18.4%) had a combination of both. The remaining 11 (28.9%) had elevated FPG (≥ 5.6 mmol/L) with or without PLG elevation. Thus, when an isolated FPG cutoff ≥ 5.6 mmol/L is used to diagnose GDM, 27 (71.0%) women would be perceived as normoglycemic. Such women had significantly higher CGMS parameters of clinical interest, such as 24-h mean glucose, fasting glucose, 1-h and 2-h postprandial glucose (PPG), 1-h PPG excursion, and peak PPG. CONCLUSIONS: An isolated FPG threshold, especially the higher cutoff ≥ 5.6 mmol/L, can potentially miss a large proportion of women (nearly three-fourths) diagnosed with GDM per WHO 2013 criteria. Eventually, such women fare significantly differently from normoglycemic women in various CGMS parameters of clinical interest.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Patients with gestational diabetes mellitus are at increased risk for type 2 diabetes mellitus or glucose intolerance postpartum compared with those without diabetes mellitus. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the association between early gestational diabetes mellitus and postpartum dysglycemia compared with gestational diabetes mellitus diagnosed by routine screening in a cohort of patients with obesity. STUDY DESIGN: This was a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial of patients with obesity and singleton, nonanomalous gestations that compared early gestational diabetes mellitus screening at 14 to 20 weeks of gestation with routine screening at 24 to 28 weeks of gestation. Patients were included in this analysis if they were diagnosed with gestational diabetes mellitus at the primary study site. The primary outcome was postpartum dysglycemia, defined as any abnormality on 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test 6 weeks postpartum or clinical diagnosis based on hyperglycemia requiring pharmacotherapy after delivery with deferred glucose tolerance test. Maternal characteristics and outcomes were compared in bivariable analysis, and logistic regression estimated the association between early gestational diabetes mellitus and postpartum dysglycemia. RESULTS: Of 119 patients included in this analysis, 30 were diagnosed by screening at <20 weeks of gestation and 89 at 24 to 28 weeks of gestation. Patients were overall similar in baseline characteristics. Patients with early gestational diabetes mellitus were more likely to have postpartum dysglycemia than those with gestational diabetes mellitus diagnosed with routine screening (36.7% vs 14.6%; odds ratio, 3.38; 95% confidence interval, 1.31-8.73). Most patients with early gestational diabetes mellitus who had postpartum dysglycemia were diagnosed clinically (n=7/11), whereas none of the patients with gestational diabetes mellitus established by routine testing were diagnosed with postpartum dysglycemia clinically. All (100%) patients with early gestational diabetes mellitus who completed a postpartum glucose tolerance test had dysglycemia compared with only 45% of patients with gestational diabetes mellitus diagnosed on routine screening. The proportion of patients who followed up for postpartum visits and the timing of follow-up were similar between groups. Postpartum glucose tolerance test completion was low but also similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Although postpartum glucose tolerance test completion is low, patients with gestational diabetes mellitus before 20 weeks of gestation, seem to be at higher risk for postpartum dysglycemia than those with gestational diabetes mellitus diagnosed at routine screening in a cohort of patients with obesity. Larger studies are needed to confirm these findings, but postpartum follow-up and diabetes mellitus testing may be even more important to improve long-term health in patients with early gestational diabetes mellitus.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To describe the epidemiology of early gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) based on the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) defined fasting glycemia. METHODS: A prospective multicenter study testing fasting venous plasma glucose (FPG) in women aged 18-45 years between 6 and 23+6 weeks of pregnancy in secondary health facilities in Ondo State, Nigeria. Early GDM was defined using the IADPSG threshold for fasting hyperglycemia, and its severity was examined. Potential risk factors for early GDM were assessed using logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Of the 8915 women who underwent FPG testing, the prevalence of early GDM was 12.5% (11.9%-13.3%). Multivariable analysis identified a dose-response association between body mass index (BMI) (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by the square of height in meters) and early GDM, with a BMI of 35 or more (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-3.55) associated with early GDM. Primiparity (aOR 1.49, 95% CI 1.25-1.76), multiparity (aOR 1.73, 95% CI 1.47-2.04), and a first-degree family history of diabetes (aOR 1.60, 95% CI 1.27-2.02) were associated with significantly higher odds of early GDM. CONCLUSION: This study established the prevalence, severity and risk factors for early GDM in a specific country that potentially represents a global region with no previous relevant data.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

AIM: Our study evaluated the performance of a selective screening strategy for hyperglycaemia in pregnancy (HIP) based on the presence of risk factors (RFs; body mass index≥25kg/m2, age≥35years, family history of diabetes, personal history of HIP or macrosomic infant) to diagnose HIP and to predict HIP-related events. METHODS: Women with no known diabetes who had undergone complete universal screening (early, before 22weeks of gestation and, if normal, in the second part of pregnancy) at our department (2012-2016) were selected, resulting in four groups of women according to the presence of HIP and/or RFs, with a predefined composite endpoint (preeclampsia or large-for-gestational-age infant or shoulder dystocia). RESULTS: Included were 4518 women: 23.5% had HIP and 71.1% had at least one RF. The distribution among our four groups was: HIP-/RF- (n=1144); HIP-/RF+ (n=2313); HIP+/RF- (n=163); and HIP+/RF+ (n=898). HIP was more frequent when RFs were present rather than absent (33.1% vs 15.4%, respectively; P<0.001). Incidence of the composite endpoint differed significantly (P<0.0001) across groups [HIP-/RF- 6.3%; HIP-/RF+ 13.2%; HIP+/RF- 8.6%; and HIP+/RF+ 17.1% (HIP effect: P<0.05; RF effect: P<0.001; interaction HIP * RF: P=0.94)] and significantly increased with the number of RFs (no RF: 6.3%, 1 RF: 10.8%, 2 RFs: 14.7%, 3 RFs: 28.0%, 4-5 RFs: 25.0%; P<0.0001). CONCLUSION: RFs are predictive of HIP, although 15.4% of women with HIP have no RFs. Also, irrespective of HIP status, RFs are predictive of HIP-related events, suggesting that overweight/obesity, the only modifiable RFs, could be targets of interventions to improve pregnancy prognosis.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

AIMS: In addition to screening for hyperglycaemia during pregnancy after 24 weeks of gestation (WG), the current guidelines also suggest screening in early pregnancy and referring women with early gestational diabetes mellitus (eGDM) or overt diabetes (OD) for immediate care. Our aim was to evaluate this strategy. METHODS: This study evaluated, at our hospital (2012-2016), whether the incidence of a predefined composite outcome (preeclampsia, large-for-gestational-age infant, shoulder dystocia) and secondary outcomes was different when women were screened only after 22WG ('late screening only') or before 22WG and treated for eGDM or OD if present, with repeat screening after 22WG if absent ('early ± late screening'). RESULTS: Early ± late screening (n = 4605, 47.0%) increased between 2012 and 2016 (P < 0.0001) and was associated with more risk factors for GDM than late screening only. Glycaemic status differed in both groups (early ± late screening: eGDM 10.3%, GDM 12.1%, OD 0.9% vs. late screening only: GDM 16.8%, OD 1.2%; P < 0.001), with a higher rate of insulin therapy (8.9% vs. 6.0%; P < 0.001) and less gestational weight gain (11.1 ± 5.4 kg vs. 11.4 ± 5.5 kg; P = 0.013) in the early ± late screening group. Rates of those meeting the composite criterion were similar in both groups [11.6% vs. 12.0%, respectively; odds ratio (OR): 1.040, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.920-1.176; P = 0.53] and remained comparable after adjusting for Propensity Scores (OR: 1.046, 95% CI: 0.924-1.185; P = 0.4790). Rates for secondary outcomes were also similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: While a strategy including early measurement of fasting plasma glucose during pregnancy increases the incidence and care of hyperglycaemia during pregnancy, it may not significantly improve pregnancy outcomes.

Asunto(s)