Core outcomes in gestational diabetes for treatment trials: The Gestational Metabolic Group treatment set

Pre-Pregnancy Diet and/or Physical Activity Interventions for the Prevention of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with short- and long-term adverse health outcomes for women and their infants. Antenatal diet and/or physical activity interventions have not been effective at preventing GDM, and currently, it is not clear whether intervening similarly prior to pregnancy is beneficial.

AIMS

This review aims to evaluate the impact of pre-pregnancy diet and/or physical activity interventions on rates of GDM and other maternal and infant health outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of the online databases Embase, Pubmed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid MEDLINE and CINAHL was conducted from inception to 7 February 2023. All randomised controlled trials comparing pre-pregnancy diet and/or physical activity interventions with standard care or control were included. Data were extracted by two reviewers independently, and meta-analysis was performed using random-effects models to calculate summary effect estimates and 95% confidence intervals. The primary outcome was GDM. Five randomised trials assessing pre-pregnancy diet and/or physical activity interventions (n = 1924 women) were included.

RESULTS

Pre-pregnancy diet and/or physical activity interventions were not associated with a significant difference in rates of GDM (2 studies; n = 214; RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.81, 1.75). There were no statistically significant differences for any of the secondary maternal or infant outcomes reported. There was significant heterogeneity between studies with regard to type, duration and intensity of the pre-pregnancy diet and/or physical activity interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no evidence that pre-pregnancy diet and/or physical activity interventions reduced the risk for GDM or other adverse maternal and infant outcomes.

Adverse pregnancy outcomes in gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

INTRODUCTION

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes, including adverse outcomes for both the mother and the fetus. Different diagnostic criteria are used for GDM, and it is not clear how these affect the reported prevalence of adverse pregnancy outcomes. This protocol is for a systematic review to describe and compare the prevalence of adverse pregnancy outcomes in GDM using the different diagnostic criteria applied in various countries/regions of the world.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A systematic review and meta-analysis will be carried out. A comprehensive search of observational studies that report the outcomes of interest to this review from 2010 to 2021 will be conducted. We will search the major electronic databases such as PubMed, Scopus, CINHAL and Google Scholar, and screen references of included studies for additional studies. Meta-analyses will be performed, if there is low heterogeneity, and pooled estimates per outcome reported. We will use the bias-adjusted inverse variance heterogeneity model and random effects models, depending on the heterogeneity observed, to pool prevalence estimates and perform subgroup analyses by region, by age group, by diagnostic criteria and by GDM screening method if sufficient data are available. We will also compare the prevalence of adverse outcomes by diagnostic method and report prevalence ratios. We will report 95% confidence estimates for all estimates.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval is not required as the review uses published data. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020155061.

Efficacy and safety of hypoglycemic agents on gestational diabetes mellitus in women: A Bayesian network analysis of randomized controlled trials

Objective

To compare the efficacy and safety of metformin, glyburide, and insulin for GDM, we conducted a subgroup analysis of outcomes for women with GDM according to the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) diagnostic criteria.

Methods

We searched the NCBI, Embase, and Web of Science databases from inception to March 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the outcomes of hypoglycemic agents in women with GDM were included. Bayesian network analysis was employed.

Results

A total of 29 RCTs were included. Metformin was estimated to lead to a slight improvement in total gestational weight gain (WMD - 1.24 kg, 95% CI -2.38, -0.09), a risk of unmet treatment target in the sensitivity analysis (OR 34.50, 95% CI 1.18-791.37) than insulin. The estimated effect of metformin showed improvements in birth weight than insulin (WMD - 102.58 g, 95% CI -180.45 to -25.49) and glyburide (WMD - 137.84 g, 95% CI -255.31 to -25.45), for hypoglycemia within 1 h of birth than insulin (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.84). The improvement in the estimated effect of metformin for hypoglycemia within 1 h of birth still existed when compared with glyburide (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.66), whether in the IADPSG group (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.92) or not (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.98).

Conclusion

Metformin is beneficial for GDM women to control total GWG compared with insulin, regulate fetal birth weight more than insulin and glyburide, and increase the risk of unmet treatment targets compared with insulin. Compared to metformin, glyburide is associated with neonatal hypoglycemia.

Community-based non-pharmacological interventions for pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Non-pharmacological interventions are the first line of Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) management. Community-based interventions are cheaper, more accessible, with higher patient satisfaction.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review community-based non-pharmacological interventions and evaluate their effectiveness for GDM.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Twelve bibliographic databases and reference list of related studies from inception until January 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All primary studies of community-based non-pharmacological interventions for GDM reported in English which investigated any behavioural or clinical outcome(s).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted using modified Cochrane's data extraction template. Studies were evaluated using Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool. Narrative synthesis was used to summarise findings. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021257634).

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies involving 6,242 pregnant women with GDM investigated self-management programmes, medical nutrition/diet therapy, exercise/physical activity, combined diet and exercise, calcium plus vitamin D supplementation, and continuous glucose monitoring. Self-management programmes were more effective than routine care in improving self-efficacy, two-hour postprandial blood glucose, and lifestyle behaviours but were as effective as routine care in improving infant birth weight. Self-management programmes were superior to or as effective as usual care in improving fasting blood glucose, blood glucose control, glycated haemoglobin, macrosomia, and preterm delivery. Medical nutrition/diet therapy was more effective than usual care in improving postprandial blood glucose levels. Postprandial blood glucose levels were better improved by regular supervised exercise plus daily brisk walks or a daily walking intervention than routine obstetric care or no treatment. The effects of exercise/physical activity programmes were mostly inconsistent for other outcomes. Diet and exercise were superior to diet alone in reducing maternal weight gain although there were similar outcomes for other pregnancy and foetal outcomes. Limited or conflicting evidence was found for other outcomes and interventions including calcium and vitamin D supplementation and continuous glucose monitoring intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Community-based non-pharmacological interventions are more effective than placebo; and are more or as effective as usual care. Self-management programmes and medical nutrition/diet therapy had the most promising GDM outcomes.

FUNDING

There was no funding for this study. The study design, data collection, data analysis and interpretation, and writing of this manuscript were not influenced externally by any funder.

Core Outcome Sets (COS) related to pregnancy and childbirth: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Systematic reviews often conclude low confidence in the results due to heterogeneity in the reported outcomes. A Core Outcome Set (COS) is an agreed standardised collection of outcomes for a specific area of health. The outcomes included in a COS are to be measured and summarized in clinical trials as well as systematic reviews to counteract this heterogeneity.

AIM

The aim is to identify, compile and assess final and ongoing studies that are prioritizing outcomes in the area of pregnancy and childbirth.

METHODS

All studies which prioritized outcomes related to pregnancy and childbirth using consensus method, including Delphi surveys or consensus meetings were included. Searches were conducted in Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Academic Search Elite, CINAHL, SocINDEX and COMET databases up to June 2021. For all studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria, information regarding outcomes as well as population, method, and setting was extracted. In addition, reporting in the finalized studies was assessed using a modified version of the Core Outcome Set-STAndards for Reporting.

RESULTS

In total, 27 finalized studies and 42 ongoing studies were assessed as relevant and were included. In the finalized studies, the number of outcomes included in the COS ranged from 6 to 51 with a median of 13 outcomes. The majority of the identified COS, both finalized as well as ongoing, were relating to physical complications during pregnancy.

CONCLUSION

There is a growing number of Core Outcome Set studies related to pregnancy and childbirth. Although several of the finalized studies follow the proposed reporting, there are still some items that are not always clearly reported. Additionally, several of the identified COS contained a large number (n > 20) outcomes, something that possibly could hinder implementation. Therefore, there is a need to consider the number of outcomes which may be included in a COS to render it optimal for future research.