Usefulness of cutoff points of the IADPSG criteria for prediction of postpartum diabetes and prediabetes among Chinese women with gestational diabetes

Author(s):  
Ninghua Li ◽  
Jing Li ◽  
Cuiping Zhang ◽  
Gongshu Liu ◽  
Junhong Leng ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 156 ◽  
pp. 107828 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuxin Fan ◽  
Weiqin Li ◽  
Huikun Liu ◽  
Leishen Wang ◽  
Shuang Zhang ◽  
...  


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yan Liu ◽  
Xiaofang Sun ◽  
Junxian Tao ◽  
Bin Song ◽  
Wei Wu ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: To determine the relationship between gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and coagulation/fibrinolysis abnormality in antenatal Chinese women. Methods: Case control study. Fifty women had GDM and 132 did not (the NGDM group) grouping by the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria. Maternal plasma biochemistry and previous medical history were collected from perinatal health records. Antenatal coagulation/fibrinolysis activity(CFA) parameters was assessed using thromboelastography and routine CFA parameters respectively. Univariate and multiple regression analyses were used to evaluate the associations between GDM and CFA parameters. Results: The women with GDM were significantly older than those without GDM (30.3 vs. 28.6 years, P=0.012). Compared with the NGDM group, the GDM group had a significantly higher prevalence of cesarean delivery (56.0% vs. 37.9%, P=0.027) and higher values of fibrinogen (FIB) (4.7vs. 4.3 g/L P=0.001), activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) (30.9 vs. 29.5 seconds P=0.010).There were no significant differences in the prevalence of maternal thrombotic events or neonatal events.GDM was significantly associated with higher APTT (β 1.41seconds, 95% CI 0.29–2.53), FIB (β 0.38g/L, 95% CI 0.14–0.61), and percentage reduction in clot lysis after 30 min(LY30)(β 1.14%, 95% CI 0.15–2.13) after adjustment for potential confounding factors. Conclusions: GDM is significantly associated with hypercoagulability and secondary hyperfibrinolysis in these antenatal Chinese women.



Diabetologia ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 64 (1) ◽  
pp. 255-258
Author(s):  
Ninghua Li ◽  
Jinnan Liu ◽  
Cuiping Zhang ◽  
Gongshu Liu ◽  
Junhong Leng ◽  
...  




2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 666
Author(s):  
Fahimeh Ramezani Tehrani ◽  
Marzieh Saei Ghare Naz ◽  
Razieh Bidhendi Yarandi ◽  
Samira Behboudi-Gandevani

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine the impact of different gestational-diabetes (GDM) diagnostic-criteria on the risk of adverse-maternal-outcomes. The search process encompassed PubMed (Medline), Scopus, and Web of Science databases to retrieve original, population-based studies with the universal GDM screening approach, published in English language and with a focus on adverse-maternal-outcomes up to January 2020. According to GDM diagnostic criteria, the studies were classified into seven groups. A total of 49 population-based studies consisting of 1409018 pregnant women with GDM and 7,667,546 non-GDM counterparts were selected for data analysis and knowledge synthesis. Accordingly, the risk of adverse-maternal-outcomes including primary-cesarean, induction of labor, maternal-hemorrhage, and pregnancy-related-hypertension, overall, regardless of GDM diagnostic-criteria and in all diagnostic-criteria subgroups were significantly higher than non-GDM counterparts. However, in meta-regression, the increased risk was not influenced by the GDM diagnostic-classification and the magnitude of the risks among patients, using the IADPSG criteria-classification as the most strict-criteria, was similar to other criteria. In conclusion, a reduction in the diagnostic-threshold increased the prevalence of GDM, but the risk of adverse-maternal-outcome was not different among those women who were diagnosed through more or less intensive strategies. Our review findings can empower health-care-providers to select the most cost-effective approach for the screening of GDM among pregnant women.



2021 ◽  
Vol 224 (2) ◽  
pp. S93-S94
Author(s):  
Catherine E. Callinan ◽  
Kent Heyborne ◽  
Karilynn Rockhill ◽  
Brendan Boe


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. e001234
Author(s):  
Sayuri Nakanishi ◽  
Shigeru Aoki ◽  
Junko Kasai ◽  
Ryosuke Shindo ◽  
Soichiro Obata ◽  
...  

IntroductionThis study aimed to assess the validity of applying the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Group (IADPSG) criteria for the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) at any time during pregnancy.Research design and methodsThis multicenter cohort study was conducted at five Japanese facilities from January 2018 to April 2019. The study cohort included women at a high risk of GDM who met one or more of the following IADPSG criteria during early pregnancy: fasting plasma glucose (FPG) ≥92 mg/dL and 75 g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) value of ≥180 mg/dL at 1 hour, or ≥153 mg/dL at 2 hour (hereafter early-onset GDM). Women diagnosed with early-onset GDM were followed up without therapeutic intervention and underwent the 75 g OGTT again during 24–28 weeks of gestation. Those exhibiting the GDM patterns on the second 75 g OGTT were diagnosed with true GDM and treated, whereas those exhibiting the normal patterns were diagnosed with false positive early GDM and received no therapeutic intervention.ResultsOf the 146 women diagnosed with early-onset GDM, 69 (47%) had normal 75 g OGTT values at 24–28 weeks of gestation, indicating a false-positive result. FPG levels were significantly higher in the first 75 g-OGTT test than in the second 75 g-OGTT test (93 mg/dL and 87.5 mg/dL, respectively; p<0.001). FPG levels were high in 86 (59%) women with early-onset GDM during early pregnancy but in only 39 (27%) women during mid-pregnancy. Compared with false positive early GDM, true GDM was more frequently associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes.ConclusionsAlthough women with early-onset GDM were followed up without treatment, the results of repeated 75 g OGTT during mid-pregnancy were normal in about 50%. Our data did not support the adoption of IADPSG thresholds for the diagnosis of GDM prior to 20 weeks of gestation.





Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document