Performance of a selective screening strategy for diagnosis of hyperglycaemia in pregnancy as defined by IADPSG/WHO criteria

Maternal and neonatal outcomes according to the timing of diagnosis of hyperglycaemia in pregnancy: a nationwide cross-sectional study of 695,912 deliveries in France in 2018

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

We aimed to assess maternal-fetal outcomes according to various subtypes of hyperglycaemia in pregnancy.

METHODS

We used data from the French National Health Data System (Système National des Données de Santé), which links individual data from the hospital discharge database and the French National Health Insurance information system. We included all deliveries after 22 gestational weeks (GW) in women without pre-existing diabetes recorded in 2018. Women with hyperglycaemia were classified as having overt diabetes in pregnancy or gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), then categorised into three subgroups according to their gestational age at the time of GDM diagnosis: before 22 GW (GDM<22); between 22 and 30 GW (GDM22-30); and after 30 GW (GDM>30). Adjusted prevalence ratios (95% CI) for the outcomes were estimated after adjusting for maternal age, gestational age and socioeconomic status. Due to the multiple tests, we considered an association to be statistically significant according to the Holm-Bonferroni procedure. To take into account the potential immortal time bias, we performed analyses on deliveries at ≥31 GW and deliveries at ≥37 GW.

RESULTS

The study population of 695,912 women who gave birth in 2018 included 84,705 women (12.2%) with hyperglycaemia in pregnancy: overt diabetes in pregnancy, 0.4%; GDM<22, 36.8%; GDM22-30, 52.4%; and GDM>30, 10.4%. The following outcomes were statistically significant after Holm-Bonferroni adjustment for deliveries at ≥31 GW using GDM22-30 as the reference. Caesarean sections (1.54 [1.39, 1.72]), large-for-gestational-age (LGA) infants (2.00 [1.72, 2.32]), Erb's palsy or clavicle fracture (6.38 [2.42, 16.8]), preterm birth (1.84 [1.41, 2.40]) and neonatal hypoglycaemia (1.98 [1.39, 2.83]) were more frequent in women with overt diabetes. Similarly, LGA infants (1.10 [1.06, 1.14]) and Erb's palsy or clavicle fracture (1.55 [1.22, 1.99]) were more frequent in GDM<22. LGA infants (1.44 [1.37, 1.52]) were more frequent in GDM>30. Finally, women without hyperglycaemia in pregnancy were less likely to have preeclampsia or eclampsia (0.74 [0.69, 0.79]), Caesarean section (0.80 [0.79, 0.82]), pregnancy and postpartum haemorrhage (0.93 [0.89, 0.96]), LGA neonate (0.67 [0.65, 0.69]), premature neonate (0.80 [0.77, 0.83]) and neonate with neonatal hypoglycaemia (0.73 [0.66, 0.82]). Overall, the results were similar for deliveries at ≥37 GW. Although the estimation of the adjusted prevalence ratio of perinatal death was five times higher (5.06 [1.87, 13.7]) for women with overt diabetes, this result was non-significant after Holm-Bonferroni adjustment.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

Compared with GDM22-30, overt diabetes, GDM<22 and, to a lesser extent, GDM>30 were associated with poorer maternal-fetal outcomes.

Evolution of maternal and neonatal outcomes before and after the adoption of the IADPSG/WHO guidelines in Belgium: A descriptive study of 444,228 pregnancies

Objectives

To appraise adverse pregnancy outcomes after the adoption of IADPSG/WHO guidelines in Belgium.

Methods

A retrospective study of the Center for Perinatal Epidemiology registry was conducted. Demographic changes and adverse pregnancy outcomes were compared between a pre- and post-guideline period in women with and without hyperglycemia in pregnancy (HIP). Adjusted odds ratios with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to compare maternal and neonatal outcomes controlling for potential confounders (maternal age, body mass index (BMI), hypertension, parity, and multiple births).

Results

The prevalence of HIP increased (6.0%–9.2%). In the overall population regardless of glycemic status, gestational weight gain (12.3 ± 5.7 vs 11.9 ± 5.8; p < 0.001), hypertension (0.92; 95% CI, 0.89–0.94; p < 0.001), and neonatal intensive care unit/special care nursery (0.89; 95% CI, 0.87–0.91; p < 0.001) decreased despite increasing maternal age and pre-pregnancy BMI. Emergency cesarean section rates (1.07; 95% CI, 1.05–1.09; p < 0.001) increased, but not in the HIP population (1.02; 95% CI, 0.95–1.10; ns). The overall incidence of preterm birth (1.09; 95% CI, 1.06–1.12; p < 0.001), stillbirth (1.10; 95% CI, 1.01–1.21; p < 0.05), and perinatal mortality (1.10; 95% CI, 1.01–1.19; p < 0.05) increased, except in the HIP population (1.03; 95% CI, 0.95–1.11; ns), (1.04; 95% CI, 0.74–1.47; ns) and (1.09; 95% CI, 0.80–1.49; ns), respectively. The overall incidence of small- for-gestational-age remained unchanged (0.99; 95%CI, 0.97–1.01; ns) regardless of glycemic status. In the HIP population, large-for-gestational age (0.90; 95% CI, 0.84–0.95; p < 0.001) and macrosomia (0.84; 95% CI, 0.78–0.92; p < 0.001) decreased.

Conclusion

After the implementation of IADPSG/WHO guidelines, the prevalence of HIP increased by 53.7% and the incidence of major HIP-related pregnancy complications appears to be lower. However, we cannot conclude that the reduction of LGA-macrosomia is due to a better management of diabetes or due to greater recruitment of women with mild HIP associated with a lower risk of obstetrical complications.

Residual risk associations between initial hyperglycemia and adverse pregnancy outcomes in a large cohort including 6709 women with gestational diabetes

AIMS

. - To estimate the residual risk associations between hyperglycemia and adverse pregnancy outcomes after glycemia-controlling intervention.

METHODS

. - Among 41,067 Chinese women, those with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), according to the IADPSG criteria, received standard interventions to control glycemia. Risk associations of plasma glucose (PG) levels with excess newborn birth weight, primary cesarean section, and preterm delivery were estimated and compared with those in the Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes (HAPO) study, where hyperglycemia was left untreated.

RESULTS

. - A total of 6,709 (16.3%) women developed GDM and thus received predominantly lifestyle interventions. The incidence of excess newborn birth weight, primary cesarean section, and preterm delivery was 6.1%, 19.1%, and 4.0%, respectively. Higher fasting and higher post-load PG levels during 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) were statistically significantly associated with increased risks of excess newborn birth weight and pre-term delivery. Compared with the HAPO study, the association of fasting PG level with excess newborn birth weight showed similar strength and dose-response pattern, contrasting with considerably weakened associations for post-load PG levels that involved glycemic control. Contrary risk associations were seen across GDM subtypes compared with non-GDM, isolated fasting GDM was associated with increased, whereas isolated post-load GDM was associated with decreased, risks of excess newborn birth weight and primary cesarean section. Limiting the analysis to non-GDM women and GDM women with low HbA1c (<6.0%) ≥30 days after interventions overall attenuated the risk associations.

CONCLUSIONS

. - Residual risk associations exist between hyperglycemia and adverse pregnancy outcomes despite seemingly appropriate glycemic control.

Prognosis Associated with Sub-Types of Hyperglycaemia in Pregnancy

We aimed to compare pregnancy outcomes in 4665 women according to the following types of hyperglycaemia in pregnancy sub-types: (i) normoglycaemia, (ii) gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), (iii) diabetes in pregnancy (DIP), (iv) early-diagnosed (i.e., <22 weeks of gestation) GDM (eGDM), and (v) early-diagnosed DIP (eDIP). The prevalence of normoglycaemia, eGDM, eDIP, GDM, and DIP was 76.4%, 10.8%, 0.6%, 11.7%, and 0.6%, respectively. With regard to pregnancy outcomes, gestational weight gain (11.5 ± 5.5, 9.0 ± 5.4, 8.3 ± 4.7, 10.4 ± 5.3, and 10.1 ± 5.0 kg, p < 0.0001) and insulin requirement (none, 46.0%, 88.5%, 25.5%, and 51.7%; p < 0.001) differed according to the glycaemic sub-types. eGDM and eDIP were associated with higher rates of infant malformation. After adjustment for confounders, with normoglycaemia as the reference, only GDM was associated with large-for-gestational-age infant (odds ratio 1.34 (95% interval confidence 1.01-1.78) and only DIP was associated with hypertensive disorders (OR 3.48 (1.26-9.57)). To conclude, early-diagnosed hyperglycaemia was associated with an increased risk of malformation, suggesting that it was sometimes present at conception. Women with GDM, but not those with eGDM, had an increased risk of having a large-for-gestational-age infant, possibly because those with eGDM were treated early and therefore had less gestational weight gain. Women with DIP might benefit from specific surveillance for hypertensive disorders.

Effect of the IADPSG screening strategy for gestational diabetes on perinatal outcomes in Switzerland

AIMS

To evaluate the impact adoption of the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria on prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and risks of perinatal outcomes.

METHODS

Retrospectively, 155,103 women screened with selective two step criteria in Switzerland in period 1 (2005-2010) were compared to 170,427 women screened with IADPSG criteria in period 2 (2012-2017). GDM prevalence over time was established and multivariable regression used to assess variation in risks for GDM related events and perinatal outcomes.

RESULTS

GDM prevalence increased steadily over both study periods from 1.8% to 9.0%. A risk reduction of GDM-related events was shown only for women with one or two risk factors for GDM present (relative risk (95% confidence interval)): (0.93 (0.90,0.97), 0.90 (0.83,0.96)). The comparison of perinatal outcomes between the two study periods revealed a significant lower risk for newborns large for gestational age (LGA) (0.93 (0.91-0.95)), pre-term delivery (0.94 (0.92-0.97)) and neonatal hypoglycemia (0.83 (0.77-0.90)) in period 2.

CONCLUSION

The introduction of the IADPSG criteria for the screening of GDM increased prevalence by threefold with no substantial improvements in GDM related events for women without risk factors but reduced the risks for LGA, neonatal hypoglycemia and preterm birth.

Limiting the Use of Oral Glucose Tolerance Tests to Screen for Hyperglycemia in Pregnancy during Pandemics

We aimed to evaluate each proposal of Australian–New Zealand Societies to limit the number of oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) to diagnose hyperglycemia in pregnancy (HIP) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. At our university hospital (2012–2016), we retrospectively applied in 4245 women who had OGTT between 22 and 30 weeks of gestation (reference standard: WHO criteria) the proposals in which OGTT is performed only in high-risk women; in all (Option 1) or high-risk (Option 1-Sel) women with fasting plasma glucose (FPG) 4.7–5.0 mmol/L; in all (Option 2) or high-risk (Option 2-Sel) women without history of HIP and with FPG 4.7–5.0 mmol/L. We also tested FPG measurement alone in all high-risk women. Measuring FPG alone had a sensitivity of 49% (95% confidence interval 45–54) applying universal screening. Option 2 appeared to have the best balance considering the needed OGTT (17.3%), sensitivity (72% (67–76)) and rates of a composite outcome (true negative cases: 10.6%, false positive cases: 24.4%; true positive cases: 19.5%; false negative cases: 10.2%). Consideration of a history of HIP and measuring first FPG can avoid more than 80% of OGTTs and identify women with the highest risk of adverse HIP-related events.

Clinical practice recommendations for the detection and management of hyperglycemia in pregnancy from South Asia, Africa and Mexico during COVID-19 pandemic

The human coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected overall healthcare delivery, including prenatal, antenatal and postnatal care. Hyperglycemia in pregnancy (HIP) is the most common medical condition encountered during pregnancy. There is little guidance for primary care physicians for providing delivery of optimal perinatal care while minimizing the risk of COVID-19 infection in pregnant women. This review aims to describe pragmatic modifications in the screening, detection and management of HIP during the COVID- 19 pandemic. In this review, articles published up to June 2021 were searched on multiple databases, including PubMed, Medline, EMBASE and ScienceDirect. Direct online searches were conducted to identify national and international guidelines. Search criteria included terms to extract articles describing HIP with and/or without COVID-19 between 1^st March 2020 and 15^th June 2021. Fasting plasma glucose, glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and random plasma glucose could be alternative screening strategies for gestational diabetes mellitus screening (at 24–28 weeks of gestation), instead of the traditional 2 h oral glucose tolerance test. The use of telemedicine for the management of HIP is recommended. Hospital visits should be scheduled to coincide with obstetric and ultrasound visits. COVID-19 infected pregnant women with HIP need enhanced maternal and fetal vigilance, optimal diabetes care and psychological support in addition to supportive measures. This article presents pragmatic options and approaches for primary care physicians, diabetes care providers and obstetricians for GDM screening, diagnosis and management during the pandemic, to be used in conjunction with routine antenatal care.

What is known and what remains unresolved regarding gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM)

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) has become a major public health issue and one of the most discussed topics in contemporary obstetrics. Due to rising prevalence of GDM worldwide impact and importance of this medical condition in good quality antenatal care is growing. GDM is associated with serious adverse perinatal outcomes and unfavorable long-term health consequences for both, mother and her child. Despite a great amount of knowledge accumulated regarding GDM, medical community remains indecisive and still debates the most appropriate diagnostic strategy, screening policy, and treatment options for pregnancies complicated with GDM. These unresolved issues generate controversies, motivate further research and contribute to the growing interest surrounding GDM. In this review we will discuss and try to explain some of them.