scholarly journals PM.58 Clinical Outcomes in Pregnant Women Newly Reclassified as Gestational Diabetes (GDM) Using IADPSG Criteria

2013 ◽  
Vol 98 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. A41.3-A42
Author(s):  
R Anthony ◽  
A Ikomi ◽  
R Khan ◽  
P Angala ◽  
S Kiss
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.


2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 186-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Terumasa Okada ◽  
Masatora Iwashina ◽  
Tomohiro Kasatani ◽  
Hidetoshi Kanno ◽  
Masanori Yoshie ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. e001538
Author(s):  
Zonglin He ◽  
Yuan Tang ◽  
Huatao Xie ◽  
Yuchen Lin ◽  
Shangqiang Liang ◽  
...  

IntroductionThe International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Group (IADPSG) criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) increased the morbidity significantly, but the cost and effectiveness of its application are still unclear. This study aimed to analyze the impact of the IADPSG criteria for diagnosing GDM in China on the perinatal outcomes, and medical expenditure of GDM women versus those with normal glucose tolerance (NGT).Research design and methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study involving 7794 women admitted at the First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University (Guangzhou, China), from November 1, 2010 to October 31, 2017. The perinatal outcomes and medical expenditure were retrieved from the electronic medical records in the hospital. Propensity score matching (PSM, in a 1:1 ratio) algorithm was used to minimize confounding effects on the difference in the two cohorts.ResultsPSM minimized the difference of baseline characteristics between women with and without GDM. Of 7794 pregnant women, half (n=3897) were all of the pregnant women with GDM admitted to the hospital during the period, the other half women had NGT and were selected randomly to match with their counterparts. Adopting the IADPSG criteria was associated with reduced risk of emergency cesarean section, polyhydramnios, turbid amniotic fluid and perineal injury (p<0.01 for all) and having any one of the adverse fetal outcomes (p<0.01), including fetal distress, umbilical cord around the neck, neonatal encephalopathy, admission to neonatal intensive care unit, birth trauma, neonatal hypoglycemia and fetal death. After PSM, the median total medical expenditure by the GDM women was ¥912.9 (US$140.7 in 2015) more than that of the the NGT women (p=0.09).ConclusionsDespite the increasing medical expenditure, screening at 24–28 gestational weeks under the IADPSG guidelines with the 2-hour, 75 g oral glucose tolerance test can improve short-term maternal and neonatal outcomes.


Life ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. 806
Author(s):  
Przemysław Ustianowski ◽  
Damian Malinowski ◽  
Patrycja Kopytko ◽  
Michał Czerewaty ◽  
Maciej Tarnowski ◽  
...  

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is carbohydrate intolerance that occurs during pregnancy. This disease may lead to various maternal and neonatal complications; therefore, early diagnosis is very important. Because of the similarity in pathogenesis of type 2 diabetes and GDM, the genetic variants associated with type 2 diabetes are commonly investigated in GDM. The aim of the present study was to examine the associations between the polymorphisms in the ADCY5 (rs11708067, rs2877716), CAPN10 (rs2975760, rs3792267), and JAZF1 (rs864745) genes and GDM as well as to determine the expression of these genes in the placenta. This study included 272 pregnant women with GDM and 348 pregnant women with normal glucose tolerance. The diagnosis of GDM was based on a 75 g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) at 24–28 weeks gestation, according to International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria. There were no statistically significant differences in the distribution of the ADCY5 gene (rs11708067, rs2877716) and CAPN10 gene (rs2975760, rs3792267) polymorphisms between pregnant women with normal carbohydrate tolerance and pregnant women with GDM. We have shown a lower frequency of JAZF1 gene rs864745 C allele carriers among women with GDM CC + CT vs. TT (OR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.41–0.87, p = 0.006), and C vs. T (OR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.60–0.95, p = 0.014). In addition, ADCY5 and JAZF1 gene expression was statistically significantly increased in the placentas of women with GDM compared with that of healthy women. The expression of the CAPN10 gene did not differ significantly between women with and without GDM. Our results indicate increased expression of JAZF1 and ADCY5 genes in the placentas of women with GDM as well as a protective effect of the C allele of the JAZF1 rs864745 gene polymorphism on the development of GDM in pregnant women.


2017 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Evelyn A. Huhn ◽  
Nadine Massaro ◽  
Simone Streckeisen ◽  
Gwendolin Manegold-Brauer ◽  
Andreas Schoetzau ◽  
...  

AbstractBackground:The aim was to evaluate the influence of the new International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) guidelines for screening of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) on GDM prevalence in a cohort from a Swiss tertiary hospital.Methods:This was a retrospective cohort study involving all pregnant women who were screened for GDM between 24 and 28 weeks of gestation. From 2008 until 2010 (period 1), a two-step approach with 1-h 50 g glucose challenge test (GCT) was used, followed by fasting, 1- and 2-h glucose measurements after a 75 g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in case of a positive GCT. From 2010 until 2013 (period 2), all pregnant women were tested with a one-step 75 g OGTT according to new IADPSG guidelines. In both periods, women with risk factors could be screened directly with a 75 g OGTT in early pregnancy.Results:Overall, 647 women were eligible for the study in period 1 and 720 in period 2. The introduction of the IADPSG criteria resulted in an absolute increase of GDM prevalence of 8.5% (3.3% in period 1 to 11.8% in period 2).Conclusions:The adoption of the IADPSG criteria resulted in a considerable increase in GDM diagnosis in our Swiss cohort. Further studies are needed to investigate if the screening is cost effective and if treatment of our additionally diagnosed GDM mothers might improve short-term as well as long-term outcome.


2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carmelo Capula ◽  
Eusebio Chiefari ◽  
Anna Vero ◽  
Biagio Arcidiacono ◽  
Stefania Iiritano ◽  
...  

Recent Italian guidelines exclude women <35 years old, without risk factors for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), from screening for GDM. To determine the effectiveness of these measures with respect to the International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria, we evaluated 2,448 pregnant women retrospectively enrolled in Calabria, southern Italy. GDM was diagnosed following the IADPSG 2010 criteria. Among 538 women <35 years old, without risk factors, who would have not been tested according to the Italian guidelines, we diagnosed GDM in 171 (31.8%) pregnants (7.0% of total pregnants). Diagnosis was made at baseline (55.6%), 1 hour (39.8%), or 2 hours (4.7%) during OGTT. Despite of appropriate treatment, GDM represented a risk factor for cesarean section, polyhydramnios, increased birth weight, admission to neonatal intensive care units, and large for gestational age. These outcomes were similar to those observed in GDM women at high risk for GDM. In conclusion, Italian recommendations failed to identify 7.0% of women with GDM, when compared to IADPSG criteria. The risk for adverse hyperglycaemic-related outcomes is similar in low-risk and high-risk pregnants with GDM. To limit costs of GDM screening, our data suggest to restrict OGTT to two steps (baseline and 1 hour).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document