The effects of implementing the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups criteria for diagnosing gestational diabetes on maternal and neonatal outcomes

The WHO 2013 oral glucose tolerance test: The utility of isolated glucose measurements - A retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

The WHO 2013 guidelines recommend screening for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) by 3-point oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). The objective of this retrospective cohort study was to evaluate GDM diagnosed by an isolated high glucose.

STUDY DESIGN

We included pregnant women deemed at risk for GDM were offered GDM screening. We examined the records of 1939 consecutively screened pregnancies at two teaching hospitals in Amsterdam during 2016-2020. Using the WHO 2013 diagnostic criteria, we calculated the proportion of GDM cases diagnosed by isolated abnormal glucose values.

RESULTS

Among those screened in our high risk cohort, GDM incidence was 31.5%. Of the GDM diagnoses, 57.0% were based on an isolated fasting glucose value, 30.9% based on multiple raised glucose measurements, 7.4% on an isolated raised 2-hour glucose and 4.7% on an isolated raised 1-hour glucose. For 1-hour glucose, the number needed to screen was 67 persons for one additional GDM case.

CONCLUSION

The 1-hour glucose in the 3 point OGTT, as suggested by the WHO 2013 guidelines for GDM, contributes only small numbers of GDM cases and a high number needed to screen (67 for 1 additional case in a selective high risk GDM screening strategy), and is likely even less effective in universally screened populations.

The Role of Adiponectin during Pregnancy and Gestational Diabetes

Pregnancy involves a range of metabolic adaptations to supply adequate energy for fetal growth and development. Gestational diabetes (GDM) is defined as hyperglycemia with first onset during pregnancy. GDM is a recognized risk factor for both pregnancy complications and long-term maternal and offspring risk of cardiometabolic disease development. While pregnancy changes maternal metabolism, GDM can be viewed as a maladaptation by maternal systems to pregnancy, which may include mechanisms such as insufficient insulin secretion, dysregulated hepatic glucose output, mitochondrial dysfunction and lipotoxicity. Adiponectin is an adipose-tissue-derived adipokine that circulates in the body and regulates a diverse range of physiologic mechanisms including energy metabolism and insulin sensitivity. In pregnant women, circulating adiponectin levels decrease correspondingly with insulin sensitivity, and adiponectin levels are low in GDM. In this review, we summarize the current state of knowledge about metabolic adaptations to pregnancy and the role of adiponectin in these processes, with a focus on GDM. Recent studies from rodent model systems have clarified that adiponectin deficiency during pregnancy contributes to GDM development. The upregulation of adiponectin alleviates hyperglycemia in pregnant mice, although much remains to be understood for adiponectin to be utilized clinically for GDM.

One-Step Compared With Two-Step Gestational Diabetes Screening and Pregnancy Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To estimate short-term maternal and neonatal outcomes with one-compared with two-step testing for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM).

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing one-step and two-step GDM testing strategies before September 2021 was conducted. We searched Ovid Medline (1946-), EMBASE (1947-), Scopus (1960-), Cochrane Central, and ClinicalTrials.gov . The primary outcome was rate of large-for-gestational age (LGA) neonates. Secondary outcomes were clinically relevant outcomes for GDM that were selected a priori.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

Titles, abstracts, and manuscripts were screened, selected, and reviewed by the first two authors. Four RCTs (24,966 patients) and 13 observational studies (710,677 patients) were analyzed.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

Pooled relative risks (RRs) were calculated with 95% CIs using random-effects models and were plotted graphically with forest plots. Study heterogeneity was evaluated using Cochran Q and Higgins I 2 tests. The quality of studies that met the inclusion criteria was evaluated with the Downs and Black checklist. Publication bias was assessed by using asymmetry of funnel plots and Harbord's test. There was no difference in the rate of LGA neonates (pooled RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.88-1.04) by testing strategy among RCTs, but patients who underwent one-step testing were more likely to be diagnosed with GDM (pooled RR 2.13; 95% CI 1.61-2.82) and treated with diabetes medications (pooled RR 2.24; 95% CI 1.21-4.15). One-step testing was associated with higher rates of neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission (pooled RR 1.12; 95% CI 1.00-1.26) and neonatal hypoglycemia (pooled RR 1.23; 95% CI 1.13-1.34). In analysis of high-quality RCTs and observational studies, one-step testing was associated with a lower rate of LGA neonates (pooled RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.95-0.98), but higher rates of GDM diagnosis, treatment, NICU admission, and neonatal hypoglycemia.

CONCLUSION

Despite a significant increase in GDM diagnosis and treatment with one-step testing, there is no difference in rate of LGA neonates compared with two-step testing among RCTs.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO, CRD42021252703.

A Clinical Update on Gestational Diabetes Mellitus

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) traditionally refers to abnormal glucose tolerance with onset or first recognition during pregnancy. GDM has long been associated with obstetric and neonatal complications primarily relating to higher infant birthweight and is increasingly recognized as a risk factor for future maternal and offspring cardiometabolic disease. The prevalence of GDM continues to rise internationally due to epidemiological factors including the increase in background rates of obesity in women of reproductive age and rising maternal age and the implementation of the revised International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups' criteria and diagnostic procedures for GDM. The current lack of international consensus for the diagnosis of GDM reflects its complex historical evolution and pragmatic antenatal resource considerations given GDM is now 1 of the most common complications of pregnancy. Regardless, the contemporary clinical approach to GDM should be informed not only by its short-term complications but also by its longer term prognosis. Recent data demonstrate the effect of early in utero exposure to maternal hyperglycemia, with evidence for fetal overgrowth present prior to the traditional diagnosis of GDM from 24 weeks' gestation, as well as the durable adverse impact of maternal hyperglycemia on child and adolescent metabolism. The major contribution of GDM to the global epidemic of intergenerational cardiometabolic disease highlights the importance of identifying GDM as an early risk factor for type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, broadening the prevailing clinical approach to address longer term maternal and offspring complications following a diagnosis of GDM.

Differential Changes in Akt and AMPK Phosphorylation Regulating mTOR Activity in the Placentas of Pregnancies Complicated by Fetal Growth Restriction and Gestational Diabetes Mellitus With Large-For-Gestational Age Infants

Background: Dysregulation of placental mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) activity has been implicated in the pathophysiology of pregnancies complicated by idiopathic fetal growth restriction (FGR) and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) with large-for-gestational-age (LGA) infants. However, the underlying mechanisms remain unclear.

Methods: We obtained placentas from women with normal pregnancies (n = 11) and pregnancies complicated by FGR (n = 12) or GDM with LGA infants (n = 12) to compare the levels of total and phosphorylated forms of Akt, AMPK, TSC2, and mTOR among the three groups and used primary cytotrophoblast cells isolated from 30 normal term placentas to study the effects of oxygen–glucose deprivation (OGD) and increasing glucose concentrations on the changes of these factors in vitro.

Results: Placentas from FGR pregnancies had lower phosphorylated Akt (p-Akt) levels (P < 0.05), higher p-AMPKα levels (P < 0.01), and lower mTOR phosphorylation (P < 0.05) compared to that of normal pregnant women. Conversely, women with GDM and LGA infants had higher p-Akt (P < 0.001), lower p-AMPKα (P < 0.05), and higher p-mTOR levels (P < 0.05) in the placentas than normal pregnant women. Furthermore, primary cytotrophoblast cells subjected to OGD had lower p-Akt and p-mTOR (both P < 0.05) and higher p-AMPKα levels (P < 0.05) than those cultured under standard conditions, but increasing glucose concentrations had opposite effects on the respective levels. Administering compound C, an AMPK inhibitor, did not significantly affect Akt phosphorylation but partially reversed mTOR phosphorylation. Administering LY294002, an Akt inhibitor, decreased p-mTOR levels, but did not change the levels of total and phosphorylated AMPKα.

Conclusion: These results suggest that Akt and AMPK are involved in the regulation of trophoblast mTOR activity in the placentas of pregnancies complicated by FGR and GDM with LGA infants.

Increasing trend in the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus in Taiwan

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

Maternal hyperglycemia leads to adverse pregnancy outcomes, and also subsequently affects both mothers and their offspring in later life. The prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus is increasing worldwide, and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is also believed to be increasing. More precise nationwide and up-to-date data on GDM are required.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A population-based retrospective cohort study was carried out with the Birth Certificate Application database and linked to the National Health Insurance Research Database to explore trends in the annual crude prevalence of GDM in all women who gave birth between 1 January 2004 and 31 December 2015 in Taiwan and their pregnancy outcomes. The registry is considered complete, reliable and accurate.

RESULTS

A total of 2,468,793 births from 2,430,307 pregnancies were reported between 1 January 2004 and 31 December 2015. Finally, 2,053,305 pregnancies were included for further analysis. The annual prevalence of GDM increased by 1.8-fold during the 12 years from 2004 to 2015, with a significant continuous increasing trend (from 7.6% to 13.4%, P < 0.001). The annual prevalence of GDM significantly increased in each age group (all trends P < 0.001), particularly for women with maternal ages of 31 years and older. Urbanization level, geographic risk factors and seasonal variations were also noted.

CONCLUSION

The annual prevalence of GDM increased by 1.8-fold in the 12-year period from 2004 to 2015 in Taiwan, with a significant continuous increasing trend (from 7.6% to 13.4%, P < 0.001).

Oral Glucose Tolerance Test Results in Pregnancy Can Be Used to Individualize the Risk of Future Maternal Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Women With Gestational Diabetes Mellitus

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to quantify the risk of future maternal type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) based on the type and number of abnormal 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) values and the diagnostic criteria used for the diagnosis of GDM.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study of all nulliparous women with a live singleton birth who underwent testing for GDM using a 75-g OGTT in Ontario, Canada (2007-2017). We estimated the incidence rate (per 1,000 person-years), overall risk (expressed as adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]), and risk at 5 years after the index pregnancy of future maternal T2DM. Estimates were stratified by the type and number of abnormal OGTT values, as well as by the diagnostic criteria for GDM (Diabetes Canada [DC] vs. International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups [IADPSG] criteria).

RESULTS

A total of 55,361 women met the study criteria. The median duration of follow-up was 4.4 (interquartile range 2.8-6.3; maximum 10.3) years. Using women without GDM as reference (incidence rate 2.18 per 1,000 person-years), women with GDM were at an increased risk of future T2DM; this risk was greater when using the DC compared with the IADPSG criteria (incidence rate 18.74 [95% CI 17.58-19.90] vs. 14.07 [95% CI 13.24-14.91] per 1,000 person-years, respectively). The risk of future maternal T2DM increased with the number of abnormal OGTT values and was highest for women with three abnormal values (incidence rate 49.93 per 1,000 person-years; aHR 24.57 [95% CI 21.26-28.39]). The risk of future T2DM was also affected by the type of OGTT abnormality: women with an abnormal fasting value had the greatest risk, whereas women with an abnormal 2-h value had the lowest risk (aHR 14.09 [95% CI 12.46-15.93] vs. 9.22 [95% CI 8.19-10.37], respectively). Similar findings to those described above were observed when the risk of T2DM at a fixed time point of 5 years after the index pregnancy was considered as the outcome of interest.

CONCLUSIONS

In women with GDM, individualized information regarding the future risk of T2DM can be provided based on the type and number of abnormal OGTT values, as well as the diagnostic criteria used for the diagnosis of GDM.

An Update on Screening Strategies for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Narrative Review

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a frequent medical complication during pregnancy. Screening and diagnostic practices for GDM are inconsistent across the world. This narrative review includes data from 87 observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and aims to give an overview of the current evidence on screening strategies and diagnostic criteria for GDM. Screening in early pregnancy remains controversial and studies show conflicting results on the benefit of screening and treatment of GDM in early pregnancy. Implementing the one-step "International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups" (IADPSG) screening strategy at 24-28 weeks often leads to a substantial increase in the prevalence of GDM, without conclusive evidence regarding the benefits on pregnancy outcomes compared to a two-step screening strategy with a glucose challenge test (GCT). In addition, RCTs are needed to investigate the impact of treatment of GDM diagnosed with IADPSG criteria on long-term maternal and childhood outcomes. Selective screening using a risk-factor-based approach could be helpful in simplifying the screening algorithm but carries the risk of missing significant proportions of GDM cases. A two-step screening method with a 50g GCT and subsequently a 75g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) with IADPSG could be an alternative to reduce the need for an OGTT. However, to have an acceptable sensitivity to screen for GDM with the IADPSG criteria, the threshold of the GCT should be lowered from 7.8 to 7.2 mmol/L. A pragmatic approach to screen for GDM can be implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic, using fasting plasma glucose (FPG), HbA1c or even random plasma glucose (RPG) to reduce the number of OGTTs needed. However, usual guidelines and care should be resumed as soon as the COVID pandemic is controlled.

Macrosomia and large for gestational age in Asia: One size does not fit all

Macrosomia, usually defined as infant birth weight of ≥4000 g, does not consider gestational age, sex, or country/region-specific differences in mean birth weight and maternal body weight. This issue is particularly relevant for Asia, where 60% of the world's population lives, due to variations in maternal size and birth weights across populations. Large for gestational age (LGA), defined as birth weight > 90th centile, is a more sensitive measure as it considers gestational age and sex, though it is dependent on the choice of growth charts. We aimed to review reporting of macrosomia and LGA in Asia. We reviewed the literature on prevalence and risk of macrosomia and LGA in Asia over the last 29 years. Prevalence of macrosomia ranged from 0.5% (India) to 13.9% (China) while prevalence of LGA ranged from 4.3% (Korea) to 22.1% (China), indicating substantial variation in prevalence within and between Asian countries. High pre-pregnancy body mass index, excessive gestational weight gain, and impaired glucose tolerance conferred risk of macrosomia/LGA. Incidence of macrosomia and LGA varies substantially within and between Asian countries, as do the growth charts and definitions. The latter makes it impossible to make comparisons but suggests differences in intrauterine growth between populations. Reporting LGA, using standardized country/regional growth charts, would better capture the incidence of high birth weight and allow for comparison and identification of contributing factors. Better understanding of local drivers of excessive intrauterine growth could enable development of improved strategies for prevention and management of LGA.

Estimated impact of introduction of new diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Implementation of new diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are still a subject of debate, mostly due to concerns regarding the effects on the number of women diagnosed with GDM and the risk profile of the women newly diagnosed.

AIM

To estimate the impact of the World Health Organization (WHO) 2013 criteria compared with the WHO 1999 criteria on the incidence of gestational diabetes mellitus as well as to determine the diagnostic accuracy for detecting adverse pregnancy outcomes.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed a single center Dutch cohort of 3338 women undergoing a 75 g oral glucose tolerance test where the WHO 1999 criteria to diagnose GDM were clinically applied. Women were categorized into four groups: non-GDM by both criteria, GDM by WHO 1999 only (excluded from GDM), GDM by WHO 2013 only (newly diagnosed) and GDM by both criteria. We compared maternal characteristics, pregnancy outcomes and likelihood ratios for adverse pregnancy outcomes.

RESULTS

Retrospectively applying the WHO 2013 criteria increased the cohort incidence by 13.1%, from 19.3% to 32.4%. Discordant diagnoses occurred in 21.3%; 4.1% would no longer be labelled as GDM, and 17.2% were newly diagnosed. Compared to the non-GDM group, women newly diagnosed were older, had higher rates of obesity, higher diastolic blood pressure and higher rates of caesarean deliveries. Their infants were more often delivered preterm, large-for-gestational-age and were at higher risk of a 5 min Apgar score < 7. Women excluded from GDM were older and had similar pregnancy outcomes compared to the non-GDM group, except for higher rates of shoulder dystocia (4.3% vs 1.3%, P = 0.015). Positive likelihood ratios for adverse outcomes in all groups were generally low, ranging from 0.54 to 2.95.

CONCLUSION

Applying the WHO 2013 criteria would result in a substantial increase in GDM diagnoses. Newly diagnosed women are at increased risk for pregnancy adverse outcomes. This risk, however, seems to be lower than those identified by the WHO 1999 criteria. This could potentially influence the treatment effect that can be achieved in this group. Evidence on treatment effects in newly diagnosed women is urgently needed.

Risk factors and adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes for women with dichorionic twin pregnancies complicated by gestational diabetes mellitus: A retrospective cross-sectional study

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

The association between gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes in twin pregnancies remains unclear. This study was undertaken to highlight risk factors for GDM in women with dichorionic (DC) twins, and to determine the association between GDM DC twins and adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes in a large homogeneous Taiwanese population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective cross-sectional study was carried out on 645 women with DC twins, excluding pregnancies complicated by one or both fetuses with demise (n = 22) or congenital anomalies (n = 9), who gave birth after 28 complete gestational weeks between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2018. Univariable and multiple logistic regression analyses were carried out.

RESULTS

Maternal age >34 years (adjusted odds ratio 2.52; 95% confidence interval 1.25-5.07) and pre-pregnancy body mass index >24.9 kg/m2 (adjusted odds ratio 2.83, 95% confidence interval 1.47-5.46) were independent risk factors for GDM in women with DC twins. Newborns from women with GDM DC twins were more likely to be admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (adjusted odds ratio 1.70, 95% confidence interval 1.06-2.72) than newborns from women with non-GDM DC twins. Other pregnancy and neonatal outcomes were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Advanced maternal age and pre-pregnancy overweight or obesity are risk factors for GDM in women with DC twins. Except for a nearly twofold increased risk of neonatal intensive care unit admission of newborns, the pregnancy and neonatal outcomes for women with GDM DC twins are similar to those for women with non-GDM DC twins.

Validation of ICD-10 Codes for Gestational and Pregestational Diabetes During Pregnancy in a Large, Public Hospital

BACKGROUND

The use of billing codes (ICD-10) to identify and track cases of gestational and pregestational diabetes during pregnancy is common in clinical quality improvement, research, and surveillance. However, specific diagnoses may be misclassified using ICD-10 codes, potentially biasing estimates. The goal of this study is to provide estimates of validation parameters (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value) for pregestational and gestational diabetes diagnosis using ICD-10 diagnosis codes compared with medical record abstraction at a large public hospital in Atlanta, Georgia.

METHODS

This study includes 3,654 deliveries to Emory physicians at Grady Memorial Hospital in Atlanta, Georgia, between 2016 and 2018. We linked information abstracted from the medical record to ICD-10 diagnosis codes for gestational and pregestational diabetes during the delivery hospitalization. Using the medical record as the gold standard, we calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for each.

RESULTS

For both pregestational and gestational diabetes, ICD-10 codes had a high-negative predictive value (>99%, Table 3) and specificity (>99%). For pregestational diabetes, the sensitivity was 85.9% (95% CI = 78.8, 93.0) and positive predictive value 90.8% (95% CI = 85, 97). For gestational diabetes, the sensitivity was 95% (95% CI = 92, 98) and positive predictive value 86% (95% CI = 81, 90).

CONCLUSIONS

In a large public hospital, ICD-10 codes accurately identified cases of pregestational and gestational diabetes with low numbers of false positives.

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.

Risk factors for abnormal postpartum glycemic states in women diagnosed with gestational diabetes by the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups criteria

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

To evaluate the rate of postpartum glycemic screening tests (PGST) in women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), and to investigate risk factors for abnormal PGST results.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the obstetric data of 1,648 women with GDM who gave birth after 28 completed weeks of gestation between 1 July 2011 and 31 December 2019 at Taipei Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taiwan. GDM was diagnosed by the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups criteria. PGST was carried out at 6-12 weeks postpartum with a 75-g, 2-h oral glucose tolerance test, and the results were classified into normal, prediabetes and diabetes mellitus. Multiple logistic regression was used to assess the associations between various risk factors and abnormal PGST results.

RESULTS

In total, 493 (29.9%) women underwent PGST and 162 (32.9%) had abnormal results, including 135 (27.4%) with prediabetes and 27 (5.5%) with diabetes mellitus. Significant risk factors for postpartum diabetes mellitus included insulin therapy during pregnancy (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 10.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.07-28.58), birthweight >4,000 g (adjusted OR 10.22, 95% CI 1.74-59.89) and preterm birth <37 weeks' gestation (adjusted OR 3.33, 95% CI 1.09-10.22); whereas prepregnancy body mass index >24.9 kg/m2 (adjusted OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.24-3.21) was the major risk factor for postpartum prediabetes.

CONCLUSIONS

Less than one-third of women with GDM underwent PGST, and nearly one-third of these women had abnormal results. Future efforts should focus on reducing the barriers to PGST in women with GDM.

Comparison of Pregnancy Outcomes Using Different Gestational Diabetes Diagnostic Criteria and Treatment Thresholds in Multiethnic Communities between Two Tertiary Centres in Australian and New Zealand: Do They Make a Difference?

Introduction: Australia, but not New Zealand (NZ), has adopted the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria to diagnose gestational diabetes (GDM). We compared pregnancy outcomes using these different diagnostic approaches. Method: Prospective data of women with GDM were collected from one NZ (NZ) and one Australian (Aus) hospital between 2007–2018. Aus screening criteria with 2-step risk-based 50 g Glucose Challenge Testing (GCT) followed by 75 g-oral glucose tolerance testing (OGTT): fasting ≥ 5.5, 2-h ≥ 8.0 mmol/L (ADIPS98) changed to a universal OGTT and fasting ≥5.1, 1-h ≥ 10, 2-h ≥ 8.5 mmol/L (IADPSG). NZ used GCT followed by OGTT with fasting ≥ 5.5, 2-h ≥ 9.0 mmol/L (NZSSD); in 2015 adopted a booking HbA1c (NZMOH). Primary outcome was a composite of macrosomia, perinatal death, preterm delivery, neonatal hypoglycaemia, and phototherapy. An Aus subset positive using NZSSD was also defined. RESULTS: The composite outcome odds ratio compared to IADPSG (1788 pregnancies) was higher for NZMOH (934 pregnancies) 2.227 (95%CI: 1.84–2.68), NZSSD (1344 pregnancies) 2.19 (1.83–2.61), and ADIPS98 (3452 pregnancies) 1.91 (1.66–2.20). Composite outcomes were similar between the Aus subset and NZ. Conclusions: The IADPSG diagnostic criteria were associated with the lowest rate of composite outcomes. Earlier NZ screening with HbA1c was not associated with a change in adverse pregnancy outcomes.

Resolving the Gestational Diabetes Diagnosis Conundrum: The Need for a Randomized Controlled Trial of Treatment

The diagnosis of and criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) continue to divide the scientific and medical community, both between and within countries. Many argue for universal adoption of the International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria and feel that further clinical trials are unjustified and even unethical. However, there are concerns about the large increase in number of women who would be diagnosed with GDM using these criteria and the subsequent impact on health care resources and the individual. This Perspective reviews the origins of the IADPSG consensus and points out some of its less well-known limitations, particularly with respect to identifying women at risk for an adverse pregnancy outcome. It also questions the clinical and cost-effectiveness data often cited to support the IADPSG glycemic thresholds. We present the argument that adoption of diagnostic criteria defining GDM should be based on response to treatment at different diagnostic thresholds of maternal glycemia. This will likely require an international multicenter trial of treatment.

Pregnancy weight gain may affect perinatal outcomes, quality of life during pregnancy, and child-bearing expenses: an observational cohort study

PURPOSE

We aimed to examine the effect of gestational weight gain (GWG) on perinatal outcomes, quality of life (QoL) during pregnancy, and medical costs of childbirth.

METHODS

The observational cohort comprised 2210 pregnant women who were classified into three groups based on their pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI) and GWG in relation to the 2020 Institute of Medicine (IOM) recommendations. The data were collected on perinatal outcomes, urinary incontinence (UI) during pregnancy, changes in sexual function, and medical costs of hospitalization for delivery. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression models were employed to explore those associations.

RESULTS

Only 42.1% of women met the 2020 IOM guidelines. After adjustments for potential confounding factors, women with above-normal GWG had adverse pregnancy outcomes, including a large fetal head circumference and macrosomia, and women with below-normal GWG were more likely to deliver low-birthweight fetuses preterm than women with normal GWG. Only 16.8% of women reported sexual activity during pregnancy. There were not significant differences in sexual activity and satisfaction, or QoL among the three GWG groups. Child-bearing expenses were higher for women with above-normal GWG than for women with normal GWG. Although the child-bearing expenses were higher for the above-normal GWG, the proportion of women with expenses above the median increased according to pre-pregnancy BMI.

CONCLUSION

Our results show that inappropriate GWG is associated with a greater risk of adverse perinatal outcomes and increased medical expenses for delivery. Healthcare providers are advised to counsel women to maintain their GWG following the 2020 IOM recommendations throughout pregnancy.

Impact of prepregnancy body mass index on pregnancy outcomes, incidence of urinary incontinence and quality of life during pregnancy - An observational cohort study

Background

To evaluate the effects of prepregnancy body mass index (BMI) on pregnancy outcomes, prevalence of urinary incontinence, and quality of life.

Methods

The observational cohort included 2210 pregnant women who were divided into 4 groups according to their prepregnancy BMI: underweight (<18.5), normal weight (18.5–24.9), overweight (25–29.9), and obese (≥30). Data were analyzed for pregnancy outcomes, prevalence of urinary incontinence during pregnancy, scores of the Short Form 12 health survey (SF-12) and changes in sexual function.

Results

Compared with normal weight, overweight and obesity were associated with advanced maternal age, low education level, multiparity, preterm delivery, cesarean section, gestational weight gain above the Institute of Medicine (IOM) guidelines, preeclampsia, gestational diabetes, macrosomia and large fetal head circumference. After adjusting for confounding factors, women with overweight and obesity were more likely to have adverse maternal outcomes (gestational weight gain above the IOM guidelines, preeclampsia and gestational diabetes) and fetal outcomes (large fetal head circumference and macrosomia) compared to normal weight women. Overweight and obese women (BMI ≥ 25) were more likely to have urinary incontinence than normal weight and underweight women. There were no significant differences in SF-12 scores among the 4 BMI groups, but more than 90% of pregnant women had reduced or no sexual activities regardless of BMI.

Conclusions

Maternal prepregnancy overweight and obesity are associated with greater risks of preeclampsia, gestational diabetes, macrosomia and urinary incontinence. Health care providers should inform women to start their pregnancy at a BMI in the normal weight category.

Have pregnancy outcomes improved with the introduction of the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups criteria in Japan?

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to investigate the effects of the introduction of the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria for diagnosing gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) on maternal and neonatal outcomes in Japan.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective study carried out at a tertiary center in Japan. Previously in Japan, GDM was diagnosed if two or more of the following Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology (JSOG) criteria were met: fasting plasma glucose ≥100 mg/dL, 1-h value ≥180 mg/dL or 2-h value ≥150 mg/dL on the 75-g oral glucose tolerance. Since 2010, GDM has been diagnosed if one or more of the following IADPSG criteria are met: fasting plasma glucose ≥92 mg/dL, 1-h value ≥180 mg/dL or 2-h value ≥153 mg/dL on the 75-g oral glucose tolerance. We compared the pregnancy outcomes of all pregnant women with singleton pregnancies after 22 weeks' gestation at our hospital before (JSOG period) and after (IADPSG period) the IADPSG criteria were adopted.

RESULTS

There were 3,912 women in the JSOG period and 4,772 in the IADPSG period. GDM prevalence increased from 2.9% in the JSOG period to 13% in the IADPSG period (P < 0.001). No significant differences between the groups were found in rates of macrosomia, or large for gestational age, and no significant differences were found in birthweight. The neonatal hypoglycemia rate and neonatal intensive care unit admission rate were significantly lower in the IADPSG period (adjusted odds ratio 0.51 and 0.78, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Introduction of the IADPSG criteria for diagnosing GDM increased GDM diagnosis frequency fourfold, but reduced neonatal intensive care unit admission and neonatal hypoglycemia rates significantly.

Diagnostic Strategies for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Review of Current Evidence

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Currently, the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) lacks uniformity. Several controversies are still under debate, especially on the method of screening and diagnosis. This review focuses on recent literature and provides current evidence for the screening and diagnosis of GDM.

RECENT FINDINGS

Selective screening would miss a significant number of women with GDM. In contrast, universal screening has been shown to be cost-effective, compared with selective screening, and is recommended by many medical societies. For the diagnostic methods for GDM, most observational cohort studies reported that the one-step method is associated with improved pregnancy outcomes and is cost-saving or cost-effective, compared with the two-step method, although these findings should be confirmed in the upcoming randomized controlled trials which compare the performance of one-step and two-step methods. On the other hand, the methods of early screening or diagnosis of GDM are varied, and current evidence does not justify their use during early pregnancy. In conclusion, current evidence favors universal screening for GDM using the one-step method. Early screening for GDM is not favorably supported by the literature.

Decreased placental apoptosis and autophagy in pregnancies complicated by gestational diabetes with large-for-gestational age fetuses

INTRODUCTION

Dysregulation of placental apoptosis and autophagy are observed in pregnancy complications including preeclampsia and fetal growth restriction. However, studies of their changes in the placentas of women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) show inconsistent results. We aimed to compare the changes in apoptosis, autophagy, and Bcl-2 family proteins in the placentas from women with normal pregnancies and those with GDM, with or without large-for-gestational age (LGA) infants and to investigate the effect of hyperglycemia on the changes in apoptosis, autophagy, and Bcl-2 family proteins in primary cytotrophoblastic cells.

METHODS

Villous tissues were obtained from normal pregnant women and those with GDM, with or without LGA infants. Primary cytotrophoblast cells were isolated from normal term placentas and cultured under standard, hyperglycemic, or hyperosmotic conditions.

RESULTS

Compared to placentas from normal pregnant women, those from GDM women with LGA infants were heavier, had lower beclin-1 and DRAM levels, less M30 and cleaved PARP immunoreactivity, and increased Ki-67 immunoreactivity. These changes were associated with increased Bcl-xL and decreased Bak levels. Increased glucose concentration led to lower ATG5, beclin-1, LC3B-II, p62, and DRAM levels, lower annexin V and M30-positive cell percentages, and less cleaved PARP changes compared with standard culture conditions. Hyperglycemia caused higher Bcl-xL levels and lower Bak and Bad levels than did standard culture conditions.

DISCUSSION

There were differential changes in apoptosis and autophagy between placentas from normal pregnant women and those from GDM women with LGA infants. Bcl-2 family proteins are likely involved in the regulation of these changes.

Changing diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes in Sweden - a stepped wedge national cluster randomised controlled trial - the CDC4G study protocol

Background

The optimal criteria to diagnose gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) remain contested. The Swedish National Board of Health introduced the 2013 WHO criteria in 2015 as a recommendation for initiation of treatment for hyperglycaemia during pregnancy. With variation in GDM screening and diagnostic practice across the country, it was agreed that the shift to new guidelines should be in a scientific and structured way. The aim of the Changing Diagnostic Criteria for Gestational Diabetes (CDC4G) in Sweden (www.cdc4g.se/en) is to evaluate the clinical and health economic impacts of changing diagnostic criteria for GDM in Sweden and to create a prospective cohort to compare the many long-term outcomes in mother and baby under the old and new diagnostic approaches.

Methods

This is a stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial, comparing pregnancy outcomes before and after the switch in GDM criteria across 11 centres in a randomised manner. The trial includes all pregnant women screened for GDM across the participating centres during January–December 2018, approximately two thirds of all pregnancies in Sweden in a year. Women with pre-existing diabetes will be excluded. Data will be collected through the national Swedish Pregnancy register and for follow up studies other health registers will be included.

Discussion

The stepped wedge RCT was chosen to be the best study design for evaluating the shift from old to new diagnostic criteria of GDM in Sweden. The national quality registers provide data on the whole pregnant population and gives a possibility for follow up studies of both mother and child. The health economic analysis from the study will give a solid evidence base for future changes in order to improve immediate pregnancy, as well as long term, outcomes for mother and child.

Trial registration

CDC4G is listed on the ISRCTN registry with study ID ISRCTN41918550 (15/12/2017)

Pregestational body mass index, trimester-specific weight gain and total gestational weight gain: how do they influence perinatal outcomes?

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association between pre-gestational body mass index (BMI), total gestational weight gain (GWG), and/or trimester-specific weight gain (GWGT) with adverse maternal or perinatal outcomes (AMPOs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Maternal clinical characteristics and pregnancy and perinatal outcomes were used to predict AMPOs. The predictive ability of BMI, GWG, or GWGT for AMPOs was analyzed using the area under the curve (AUC). Logistic regression models in a univariate and multivariate analysis were performed to estimate the odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) to predict maternal outcomes (pregnancy-induced hypertension, preeclampsia or gestational diabetes mellitus) and perinatal outcomes (small for gestational age, large for gestational age, 5-min Apgar score, admission to neonatal intensive care unit or umbilical cord pH <7.15).

RESULTS

Women with AMPOs (n = 293) were younger with higher rate of nulliparity (p < .001) and with lower height (p = .018) as compared to controls (n = 134). In the univariate study, GWGT in third trimester was associated with double risk of pregnancy-induced hypertension (OR 2.00; 95% CI, 1.01-3.97). Nonetheless, third-trimester GWG and total GWG have a negative relationship with gestational diabetes mellitus OR 0.32 (95% CI, 0.18-0.58) and OR 0.35 (95% CI, 0.21-0.59), respectively. Women with greater overall and in second trimester, GWG have a lower risk of having SGA neonates, OR 0.62 (95% CI, 0.39-0.98) and OR 0.60 (95% CI, 0.37-0.98), respectively. In the multivariate study, pre-gestational BMI is strongly related to the development of preeclampsia and the area under the curve (AUC) of the combination of pre-gestational BMI and total weight gain was 0.832 (95% CI, 0.63-0.81) for preeclampsia and 0.719 (95% CI, 0.71-0.94) for gestational diabetes mellitus.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest than timing of gestational weight gain influence in maternal and perinatal outcomes. Pre-gestational BMI is a determinant of preeclampsia, maternal weight gain in the third trimester is a determinant of pregnancy-induced hypertension and the increase in total GWG reduces the risk of gestational diabetes mellitus and small for gestational age.

Risk factors for gestational diabetes mellitus among women screened with the two-step and one-step methods: A before-and-after study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the risk profiles for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) using a one-step and two-step screening method and diagnostic criteria.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted among women screened using Carpenter and Coustan's (C&C) criteria (two-step method) and the International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria (one-step method). All deliveries after 28 weeks of gestation, except for pregnancies complicated by pre-pregnancy diabetes mellitus, were analyzed. Multiple logistic regression was used to assess the associations between GDM and various potential risk factors.

RESULTS

Risk factors for C&C-defined GDM were pre-pregnancy body mass index >24.2 kg/m² (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.92-3.23), maternal age at delivery >34 years (adjusted OR 2.46, 95% CI 1.96-3.09), history of fetal death (adjusted OR 2.56, 95% CI 1.37-4.78), and chronic hypertension (adjusted OR 3.66, 95% CI 1.50-8.91). In addition to these factors, conception assisted by reproductive technology (adjusted OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.19-2.25) and genetic amniocentesis (adjusted OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.03-1.38) were IADPSG-defined GDM risk factors.

CONCLUSION

Risk factors for GDM differ with the diagnostic criteria used. This information is important when changing GDM screening strategies from the two-step approach to the one-step approach.

Perspectives on diagnostic strategies for HIP-dealing with the barriers and challenges: USA

BACKGROUND

Gestational diabetes (GDM) affects up to 7-18% of pregnant women and is associated with several maternal and perinatal morbidities. International organizations suggest several different recommendations regarding how to screen and to manage hyperglycemia in pregnancy (HIP).

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to analyze the most important and employed guidelines about screening and management of HIP and we investigated existing related literature.

RESULTS

We found several different criteria for screening for HIP, with the main difference being between non-USA-based IADPSG (One-step) approach, and the USA-based (Two-step) approach. The use of IADPSG approach (One-step) is associated with an increase in the incidence of GDM, improvement of several maternal and perinatal outcomes, and cost-effectiveness, compared to the USA-based Two-step criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

As the One-Step approach endorsed by IADPSG, WHO, and FIGO is associated with maternal and perinatal benefits, it should be preferred to the Two-Step approach currently endorsed by the USA-based societies such as ACOG and SMFM. The hope is to approve universal screening guidelines based on the One-step approach to improve health care and reduce costs and adverse outcomes for women with GDM.

Pregnancy outcomes in women with gestational diabetes mellitus diagnosed according to the WHO-2013 and WHO-1999 diagnostic criteria: a multicentre retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization (WHO) adopted more stringent diagnostic criteria for GDM in 2013, to improve pregnancy outcomes. However, there is no global consensus on these new diagnostic criteria, because of limited evidence. The objective of the study was to evaluate maternal characteristics and pregnancy outcomes in two cohorts in the Netherlands applying different diagnostic criteria for GDM i.e. WHO-2013 and WHO-1999.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective study involving singleton GDM pregnancies in two regions, between 2011 and 2016. Women were diagnosed according to the WHO-2013 criteria in the Deventer region (WHO-2013-cohort) and according to the WHO-1999 criteria in the Groningen region (WHO-1999-cohort). After GDM diagnosis, all women were treated equally based on the national guideline. Maternal characteristics and pregnancy outcomes were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

In total 1386 women with GDM were included in the study. Women in the WHO-2013-cohort were older and had a higher pre-gestational body mass index. They were diagnosed earlier (24.9 [IQR 23.3-29.0] versus 27.7 [IQR 25.9-30.7] weeks, p = < 0.001) and less women were treated with additional insulin therapy (15.6% versus 43.4%, p = < 0.001). Rate of spontaneous delivery was higher in the WHO-2013-cohort (73.1% versus 67.4%, p = 0.032). The percentage large-for-gestational-age (LGA) neonates (birth weight > 90th percentile, corrected for sex, ethnicity, parity, and gestational age) was lower in the WHO-2013- cohort, but not statistical significant (16.5% versus 18.5%, p = 0.379). There were no differences between the cohorts regarding stillbirth, birth trauma, low Apgar score, and preeclampsia.

CONCLUSIONS

Using the new WHO-2013 criteria resulted in an earlier GDM diagnosis, less women needed insulin treatment and more spontaneous deliveries occurred when compared to the cohort diagnosed with WHO-1999 criteria. No differences were found in adverse pregnancy outcomes.

Early postpartum metabolic syndrome in women with or without gestational diabetes: Results from Life after Gestational Diabetes Ahvaz cohort study

AIMS

This study aimed to determine the prevalence rate of metabolic syndrome and its potential risk factors, 6-12 weeks postpartum in women with GDM compared to women with normal glucose tolerance.

METHODS

LAGAs is an ongoing population-based prospective cohort study that started in March 2015 in Ahvaz, Iran. During 11 months of study progression, 176 women with GDM pregnancy and 86 healthy women underwent a fasting glucose test, 75-g OGTT and fasting lipid tests at 6-12 weeks postpartum. GDM was defined based on IADPSG criteria. Postpartum glucose intolerance was defined according to ADA criteria and metabolic syndrome using 2 sets of criteria.

RESULTS

The overall rate of metabolic syndrome at 6-12 weeks postpartum was 16% by NCEP-ATP III criteria (18.2% in women with GDM and 11.6% in controls) and 19.1% by IDF criteria (21% in women with gestational diabetes and 15.1% in controls). Pre-pregnancy overweight or obesity, (OR 1.89, 95% CI: 1.05-3.38, P = .03), pregnancy systolic blood pressure (OR 1.03, 95% CI: 1.008-1.52, P = .006) and requiring insulin or metformin (OR 3.08, 95% CI: 1.25-7.60, P = 0.01), were associated risk factors for the presence of MetS in GDM-exposed women. In women with normal glucose during pregnancy, pre-pregnancy BMI ≥25 kg/m² was a risk factor of metabolic syndrome (OR 2.82, 95% CI: 1.11-7.15, P = .02).

CONCLUSION

The rate of metabolic syndrome in women with or without GDM at 6-12 weeks postpartum is high particularly in women with high BMI. An early postpartum prevention and screening program for cardiovascular risk factors is important for women with GDM.

Prevalence of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in Eastern and Southeastern Asia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

AIM

To review the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in Eastern and Southeastern Asia.

METHODS

We systematically searched for observational studies on GDM prevalence from January 2000 to December 2016. Inclusion criteria were original English papers, with full texts published in peer-reviewed journals. The quality of included studies was evaluated using the guidelines of the National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia. Fixed effects and random effects models were used to estimate the summary prevalence of GDM and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

A total of 4415 papers were screened, and 48 studies with 63 GDM prevalence observations were included in the final review. The pooled prevalence of GDM was 10.1% (95% CI: 6.5%-15.7%), despite substantial variations across nations. The prevalence of GDM in lower- or upper-middle income countries was about 64% higher than in their high-income counterparts. Moreover, the one-step screening method was twice more likely to be used in diagnosing GDM when compared to the two-step screening procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of GDM in Eastern and Southeastern Asia was high and varied among and within countries. There is a need for international uniformity in screening strategies and diagnostic criteria for GDM.

Are women positive for the One Step but negative for the Two Step screening tests for gestational diabetes at higher risk for adverse outcomes?

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to evaluate if women meeting criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) by the One Step test as per International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria but not by other less strict criteria have adverse pregnancy outcomes compared with GDM-negative controls. The primary outcome was the incidence of macrosomia, defined as birthweight > 4000 g.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Electronic databases were searched from their inception until May 2017. All studies identifying pregnant women negative at the Two Step test, but positive at the One Step test for IADPSG criteria were included. We excluded studies that randomized women to the One Step vs. the Two Step tests; studies that compared different criteria within the same screening method; randomized studies comparing treatments for GDM; and studies comparing incidence of GDM in women doing the One Step test vs. the Two Step test.

RESULTS

Eight retrospective cohort studies, including 29 983 women, were included. Five study groups and four control groups were identified. The heterogeneity between the studies was high. Gestational hypertension, preeclampsia and large for gestational age, as well as in some analyses cesarean delivery, macrosomia and preterm birth, were significantly more frequent, and small for gestational age in some analyses significantly less frequent, in women GDM-positive by the One Step, but not the Two Step.

CONCLUSION

Women meeting criteria for GDM by IADPSG criteria but not by other less strict criteria have an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes such as gestational hypertension, preeclampsia and large for gestational age, compared with GDM-negative controls. Based on these findings, and evidence from other studies that treatment decreases these adverse outcomes, we suggest screening for GDM using the One Step IADPSG criteria.

Combined diet and exercise interventions for preventing gestational diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with a wide range of adverse health consequences for women and their infants in the short and long term. With an increasing prevalence of GDM worldwide, there is an urgent need to assess strategies for GDM prevention, such as combined diet and exercise interventions. This is an update of a Cochrane review that was first published in 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of diet interventions in combination with exercise interventions for pregnant women for preventing GDM, and associated adverse health consequences for the mother and her infant/child.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (27 November 2016) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs, comparing combined diet and exercise interventions with no intervention (i.e. standard care), that reported on GDM diagnosis as an outcome. Quasi-RCTs were excluded. Cross-over trials were not eligible for inclusion. We planned to include RCTs comparing two or more different diet/exercise interventions, however none were identified.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data, assessed the risk of bias of the included trials and assessed quality of evidence for selected maternal and infant/child outcomes using the GRADE approach. We checked data for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

In this update, we included 23 RCTs (involving 8918 women and 8709 infants) that compared combined diet and exercise interventions with no intervention (standard care). The studies varied in the diet and exercise programs evaluated and health outcomes reported. None reported receiving funding from a drug manufacturer or agency with interests in the results. Overall risk of bias was judged to be unclear due to the lack of methodological detail reported. Most studies were undertaken in high-income countries.For our primary review outcomes, there was a possible reduced risk of GDM in the diet and exercise intervention group compared with the standard care group (average risk ratio (RR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71 to 1.01; 6633 women; 19 RCTs; Tau² = 0.05; I² = 42%; P = 0.07; moderate-quality evidence). There was also a possible reduced risk of caesarean section (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.02; 6089 women; 14 RCTs; moderate-quality evidence). No clear differences were seen between groups for pre-eclampsia (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.22; 5366 participants; 8 RCTs; low-quality evidence), pregnancy-induced hypertension and/or hypertension (average RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.27; 3073 participants; 6 RCTs; Tau² = 0.19; I² = 62%; very low-quality evidence), perinatal mortality (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.63; 3757 participants; 2 RCTs; low-quality evidence) or large-for-gestational age (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.07; 5353 participants; 11 RCTs; low-quality evidence). No data were reported for infant mortality or morbidity composite.Subgroup analyses (based on trial design, maternal body mass index (BMI) and ethnicity) revealed no clear differential treatment effects. We were unable to assess the impact of maternal age, parity and specific features of the diet and exercise interventions. Findings from sensitivity analyses (based on RCT quality) generally supported those observed in the main analyses. We were not able to perform subgroup analyses based on maternal age, parity or nature of the exercise/dietary interventions due to the paucity of information/data on these characteristics and the inability to meaningfully group intervention characteristics.For most of the secondary review outcomes assessed using GRADE, there were no clear differences between groups, including for perineal trauma (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.05; 2733 participants; 2 RCTs; moderate-quality evidence), neonatal hypoglycaemia (average RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.98; 3653 participants; 2 RCTs; Tau² = 0.23; I² = 77%; low quality evidence); and childhood adiposity (BMI z score) (MD 0.05, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.40; 794 participants; 2 RCTs; Tau² = 0.04; I² = 59%; low-quality evidence). However, there was evidence of less gestational weight gain in the diet and exercise intervention group compared with the control group (mean difference (MD) -0.89 kg, 95% CI -1.39 to -0.40; 5052 women; 16 RCTs; Tau² = 0.37; I² = 43%;moderate-quality evidence). No data were reported for maternal postnatal depression or type 2 diabetes; childhood/adulthood type 2 diabetes, or neurosensory disability.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-quality evidence suggests reduced risks of GDM and caesarean section with combined diet and exercise interventions during pregnancy as well as reductions in gestational weight gain, compared with standard care. There were no clear differences in hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, perinatal mortality, large-for-gestational age, perineal trauma, neonatal hypoglycaemia, and childhood adiposity (moderate- tovery low-quality evidence).Using GRADE methodology, the evidence was assessed as moderate to very low quality. Downgrading decisions were predominantly due to design limitations (risk of bias), and imprecision (uncertain effect estimates, and at times, small sample sizes and low event rates), however two outcomes (pregnancy-induced hypertension/hypertension and neonatal hypoglycaemia), were also downgraded for unexplained inconsistency (statistical heterogeneity).Due to the variability of the diet and exercise components tested in the included studies, the evidence in this review has limited ability to inform practice. Future studies could describe the interventions used in more detail, if and how these influenced behaviour change and ideally be standardised between studies. Studies could also consider using existing core outcome sets to facilitate more standardised reporting.

Efficacy of probiotic supplement for gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Probiotic supplement might be beneficial for gestational diabetes mellitus. However, the results remained controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the efficacy of probiotic supplement in gestational diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of science, EBSCO, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of probiotic supplement in gestational diabetes mellitus were included. Two investigators independently searched articles, extracted data, and assessed the quality of included studies. The primary outcome were fasting serum insulin and fasting plasma glucose. Meta-analysis was performed using the fixed-effect or random-effect model.

RESULTS

Six RCTs involving 830 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with control intervention in gestational diabetes mellitus, probiotic supplementation intervention was found to significantly reduce fasting serum insulin (Std. mean difference = -0.95; 95% CI = -1.73 to -0.17; p < .00001) and HOMA-IR (Std. mean difference = -1.12; 95% CI = -2.05 to -0.18; p = .02), but showed no substantial impact on fasting plasma glucose (Std. mean difference = -0.49; 95% CI = -1.05-0.08; p = .09), gestational age (Std. mean difference = 0.07; 95% CI = -0.20-0.34; p = .63), and gestational weight (Std. mean difference = -0.11; 95% CI = -0.38-0.16; p = .43).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with control intervention in gestational diabetes mellitus, probiotic supplementation was found to significantly reduce insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) and fasting serum insulin, but had no substantial influence on fasting plasma glucose, gestational age and gestational weight.

Association Between Type of Screening for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus and Cesarean Delivery

OBJECTIVE

To compare maternal and neonatal outcomes using two different testing strategies for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) diagnosis: the International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) and Carpenter-Coustan approaches. Specifically, we wanted to compare the rates of cesarean delivery between the two epochs.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of women with a singleton pregnancy delivering at 37 0/7 weeks of gestation or greater, between 2010 and 2015, in a single tertiary care center. The IADPSG testing was used for GDM diagnosis from December 2010 until July 2013 when institutional guidelines changed to Carpenter-Coustan testing. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were compared between these two different epochs using bivariable and multivariable analyses. The primary outcome was the frequency of cesarean delivery.

RESULTS

The analysis included a total of 23,509 women: 14,074 (60%) from the IADPSG epoch and 9,435 (40%) from the Carpenter-Coustan epoch. The incidence of GDM diagnosis was higher using the IADPSG compared with Carpenter-Coustan criteria (8.3% compared with 7.5%, P=.042). The total (27.0% compared with 25.5% P=.022) as well as primary cesarean delivery rates (19.1% compared with 18.0%, P=.041) were higher during the IADPSG epoch. The rates of total (39.1% compared with 37.5%, P=.594) and primary (27.3% compared with 27.0%, P=.903) cesarean delivery among women with GDM did not differ between the two epochs. Secondary outcomes of shoulder dystocia (2.5% compared with 2.1%, P=.043) and neonatal intensive care unit admission (3.2% compared with 2.0%, P<.001) also were significantly higher in women screened during the IADPSG epoch, whereas hypertensive disease of pregnancy (6.9% compared with 7.7%, P=.018) was less frequent during the IADPSG epoch. These findings persisted after adjusting for potential confounding factors.

CONCLUSION

Compared with testing using the Carpenter-Coustan criteria, the IADPSG criteria for diagnosis of GDM were associated with higher rates of GDM, cesarean delivery, shoulder dystocia, and neonatal intensive care unit admission. Obstetric care provider knowledge of GDM diagnosis might have affected decision-making regarding the route of delivery.

A retrospective study comparing outcomes in a midwestern US population after introduction of IADPSG guidelines for gestational diabetes

OBJECTIVE

More evidence is required to endorse the 1-step approach for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) for clinical practice. Since 2010, our department has pragmatically allowed faculty to self-select the guidelines they use to screen and diagnose GDM. We sought to compare the maternal and neonatal outcomes from these two simultaneous cohorts.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a retrospective cohort study of all singleton pregnancies delivered between October 2011 and -November 2013 at our hospital. Patients were excluded if they had preexisting diabetes, were not screened or screened inappropriately, or their fetus had congenital anomalies. Patients were grouped by their screening strategy, and maternal and neonatal outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

The 1-step group had a higher incidence of GDM (21.6% versus 5.0%). Initial results suggested higher rates of neonatal hypoglycemia, phototherapy for hyperbilirubinemia, and a lower rate of gestational HTN. After adjustment, these differences disappeared, but a lower rate of large for gestational age (LGA) infants was discovered (adjusted odds ratios (aOR) 0.78).

CONCLUSION

The picture remains unclear as to whether the 1-step approach is associated with significantly improved outcomes compared with the 2-step approach. We did find a lower risk for a LGA infant in our 1-step cohort, but it is unlikely that the 1-step approach would be cost-effective due to the absence of other improved outcomes.

Scientific Evidence for Different Options for GDM Screening and Management: Controversies and Review of the Literature

Background. Gestational diabetes (GDM) affects up to 7% of pregnant women and is associated with several maternal and perinatal morbidities. International organizations suggest several different recommendations regarding how to screen and to manage GDM. Objective. We aimed to analyze the most important and employed guidelines about screening and management of GDM and we investigated existing related literature. Results. We found several different criteria for screening for GDM, for monitoring GDM, and for starting pharmacological therapy. When using IADPSG criteria, GDM rate increased, perinatal outcomes improved, and screening became cost-effective. Compared to no treatment, treatment of women meeting criteria for GDM by IADPSG criteria but not by other less strict criteria has limited evidence for an effect on adverse pregnancy outcomes.

Effects of Implementing International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups Gestational Diabetes Screening on Pregnancy Outcomes at a Small Community Teaching Hospital

IN BRIEF Traditional methods of screening for and diagnosing gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) have been challenged, leading to the development of new screening guidelines by the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG). This study is a retrospective comparison of pregnancy outcomes based on the Carpenter and Coustan (CC) and IADPSG screening guidelines. It demonstrates that adoption of IADPSG guidelines increased the rate of GDM diagnosis and resulted in more women with diet-controlled GDM. However, a decrease in adverse pregnancy outcomes was not noted. Interestingly, women diagnosed by IADPSG criteria who had diet-controlled GDM had less maternal weight gain than those screened with the CC criteria who did not have GDM but did have an elevated 1-hour oral glucose tolerance test result.

A Comparison of Pregnancy Outcomes Using Two Diagnostic Criteria for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus-Carpenter Coustan Criteria and International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) Criteria

Objective

To compare the maternal and perinatal outcomes in women with GDM diagnosed by Carpenter & Coustan (CC) criteria and by the International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria.

Methodology

A cross-sectional comparative study was conducted using data of women who were screened and diagnosed with GDM between April 2006-March 2007 using the CC criteria and April 2013-March 2014 using IADPSG criteria. Maternal and perinatal outcomes were noted. Means and proportions were calculated for continuous and categorical variables respectively. Data were analyzed using t-test for normally distributed data and Mann-Whitney U test for those that were not normally distributed. Pearson Chi-square test was used to find an association between the various outcomes between the two groups.

Results

Among 500 pregnant women screened, 36 were diagnosed GDM in the CC group. In the IADPSG group, 733 women were screened and 167 were diagnosed GDM. Prevalence of GDM was 7.2% in CC group and 22.78% in IADPSG group (p=0.000). There was a statistically significant difference in the number of women who developed hypertension and polyhydramnios among the two groups. Women who had an operative vaginal delivery (16.67% vs. 6.6%, p=0.085) and mean birth weight (3.10 ± 0.55 kg vs. 2.97 ± 0.48 kg, p=0.165) were higher in CC group than the IADPSG group. Among the perinatal outcomes, a statistically significant improvement was found in the number of neonates developing respiratory distress syndrome (p=0.000) and hyperbilirubinemia (p=0.000), when the IADPSG criteria were used.

Conclusions

There is a statistically significant difference between the maternal and neonatal outcomes when the newer IADPSG criteria were used for diagnosis of GDM.

Gestational diabetes mellitus in an Iranian pregnant population using IADPSG criteria: Incidence, contributing factors and outcomes

AIMS

Different approaches for screening and diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus(GDM) have great impact on all process of management of gestational diabetes and its future complications. The aims of this study were to evaluate rate, risk factors and outcomes of GDM based on International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups diagnostic criteria.

MATERIALS

In a prospective study pregnant women attended 5 clinics in Ahvaz, screened for gestational diabetes mellitus using IADPSG criteria and followed up delivery from August 2014 to February 2015. At the first prenatal visit women underwent the fasting blood sugar test. A 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) was performed for 750 mothers between 24 and 32 weeks of gestation. Logistic regression test for calculating the odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals was used.

RESULTS

The mean age of participants was 28.43±5.52years. The overall rate of GDM in our study was 29.9% (224/750). Incidence of gestational diabetes was associated with age group≥35years [OR=1.92(95% CI, 1.19-3.09)], family history of diabetes [OR=2.47(95% CI, 1.33-4.59)], previous GDM [OR=3.12(1.35-7.19)], BMI≥25 [OR=1, 71(1.10-2.67)] Using logistic regression. The most common maternal complication in studied women was cesarean section followed by hypertension and preeclampsia.

CONCLUSION

About one third of studied women diagnosed as GDM according to the IADPSG criteria. Risk factors of GDM were maternal age, family history of diabetes, Previous GDM, overweight and obesity before pregnancy, the same reported factors with 2 steps approach. Higher rate of GDM using this criterion may increase concern about healthcare costs and workloads.

Prevalence of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in urban and rural Tamil Nadu using IADPSG and WHO 1999 criteria (WINGS 6)

BACKGROUND

To determine the prevalence of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM) in urban and rural Tamil Nadu in southern India, using the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) and the World Health Organization (WHO) 1999 criteria for GDM.

METHODS

A total of 2121 pregnant women were screened for GDM from antenatal clinics in government primary health centres of Kancheepuram district (n = 520) and private maternity centres in Chennai city in Tamil Nadu (n = 1601) between January 2013 to December 2014. Oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTT) were done after an overnight fast of at least 8 h, using a 75 g glucose load and venous samples were drawn at 0, 1 and 2 h. GDM was diagnosed using both the IADPSG criteria as well as the WHO 1999 criteria for GDM.

RESULTS

The overall prevalence of GDM after adjusting for age, BMI, family history of diabetes and previous history of GDM was 18.5 % by IADPSG criteria with no significant urban/rural differences (urban 19.8 % vs rural 16.1 %, p = 0.46). Using the WHO 1999 criteria, the overall adjusted prevalence of GDM was 14.6 % again with no significant urban/rural differences (urban 15.9 % vs rural 8.9 %, p = 0.13).

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of GDM by IADPSG was high both using IADPSG as well as WHO 1999 criteria with no significant urban/rural differences. This emphasizes the need for increasing awareness about GDM and for prevention of GDM in developing countries like India.