Risk factor screening for abnormal glucose tolerance in pregnancy

Trends in Screening for Diabetes in Early Pregnancy in the United States

Objective: The aim of this study was to characterize current diabetes screening practices in the first trimester of pregnancy in the United States, evaluate patient characteristics and risk factors associated with early diabetes screening, and compare perinatal outcomes by early diabetes screening. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of US medical claims data of persons diagnosed with a viable intrauterine pregnancy and who presented for care with private insurance before 14 weeks of gestation, without pre-existing pregestational diabetes, from the IBM MarketScan® database for the period January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2018. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to evaluate perinatal outcomes. Results: A total of 400,588 pregnancies were identified as eligible for inclusion, with 18.0% of persons receiving early screening for diabetes. Of those with laboratory order claims, 53.1% underwent hemoglobin A1c testing, 30.0% underwent fasting glucose testing, and 16.9% underwent oral glucose tolerance testing. Compared with those who did not undergo early diabetes screening, those who did were more likely to be older; obese; having a history of gestational diabetes, chronic hypertension, polycystic ovarian syndrome, or hyperlipidemia; and having a family history of diabetes. In adjusted logistic regression, history of gestational diabetes (adjusted odds ratio 3.99; 95% confidence interval 3.73-4.26) had the strongest association with early diabetes screening. Adverse perinatal outcomes, including a higher rate of cesarean delivery, preterm delivery, preeclampsia, and gestational diabetes, occurred more frequently among women who underwent early diabetes screening. Conclusions: First-trimester early diabetes screening was mostly commonly performed by hemoglobin A1c evaluation, and persons who underwent early diabetes screening were more likely to experience adverse perinatal outcomes.

Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in Pregnancy Increased Erythropoietin Level Affecting Differentiation Potency of Haematopoietic Stem Cell of Umbilical Cord Blood

Background: The in utero environment has many factors that can support cell differentiation. Cytokines, chemokines and growth factors play big roles in haematopoietic mechanisms. Some diseases like gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) might affect the environment and haematopoietic stem cell (HSC) quality. The aim of this study is to investigate the adverse effects of GDM on umbilical cord blood (UCB) HSC in terms of differentiation potency including the UCB parameters used for banking and transplantation purposes. Methods: UCB-HSC was collected from 42 GDM and 38 normal pregnancies. UCB-HSC was isolated and further enriched using immuno-magnetic separation beads (MACS). The UCB-HSC were cultured in methylcellulose media to investigate the differentiation potency. The level of erythropoietin (EPO) and insulin in the UCB plasma was measured using enzyme linked immunoassay (ELISA) technique. Result: The UCB parameters; volume, total nucleated count (TNC) and total CD34+ cells were significantly reduced in the GDM group compared to the control group. The number of HSC progenitors' colonies were significantly reduced in the GDM group except for progenitor BFU-E, which was significantly increased (GDM = 94.19 ± 6.21, Control = 73.61 ± 2.73, p = 0.010). This data was associated with higher EPO level in GDM group. However, the insulin level in the GDM group was comparable to the Control group. Conclusion: Our results suggest that the changes in the in utero environment due to abnormalities during pregnancy such as GDM might affect the differentiation potency of UCB-HSC. These findings can be considered as an additional parameter for the inclusion and exclusion criteria for UCB banking, particularly for mothers with GDM.

Prevalence and risk factors of gestational diabetes mellitus in Asia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a of the major public health issues in Asia. The present study aimed to determine the prevalence of, and risk factors for GDM in Asia via a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Ovid, Scopus and ScienceDirect for observational studies in Asia from inception to August 2017. We selected cross sectional studies reporting the prevalence and risk factors for GDM. A random effects model was used to estimate the pooled prevalence of GDM and odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Eighty-four studies with STROBE score ≥ 14 were included in our analysis. The pooled prevalence of GDM in Asia was 11.5% (95% CI 10.9-12.1). There was considerable heterogeneity (I2 > 95%) in the prevalence of GDM in Asia, which is likely due to differences in diagnostic criteria, screening methods and study setting. Meta-analysis demonstrated that the risk factors of GDM include history of previous GDM (OR 8.42, 95% CI 5.35-13.23); macrosomia (OR 4.41, 95% CI 3.09-6.31); and congenital anomalies (OR 4.25, 95% CI 1.52-11.88). Other risk factors include a BMI ≥25 kg/m2 (OR 3.27, 95% CI 2.81-3.80); pregnancy-induced hypertension (OR 3.20, 95% CI 2.19-4.68); family history of diabetes (OR 2.77, 2.22-3.47); history of stillbirth (OR 2.39, 95% CI 1.68-3.40); polycystic ovary syndrome (OR 2.33, 95% CI1.72-3.17); history of abortion (OR 2.25, 95% CI 1.54-3.29); age ≥ 25 (OR 2.17, 95% CI 1.96-2.41); multiparity ≥2 (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.24-1.52); and history of preterm delivery (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.21-3.07).

CONCLUSION

We found a high prevalence of GDM among the Asian population. Asian women with common risk factors especially among those with history of previous GDM, congenital anomalies or macrosomia should receive additional attention from physician as high-risk cases for GDM in pregnancy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (2017: CRD42017070104 ).

Prevalence and risk factors of gestational diabetes mellitus in a population of pregnant women attending three health facilities in Limbe, Cameroon: a cross-sectional study

INTRODUCTION

There are few studies regarding gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in the South West Region of Cameroon. We aimed at determining the prevalence and risk factors of GDM in three health facilities in the Limbe health district, Cameroon.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was carried out in one secondary, and two primary healthcare facilities in Limbe, Cameroon during the period 1st November 2016 to 31st January 2017. We administered a pretested questionnaire on 200 consenting pregnant women at 24-28 weeks' gestation. We carried out a 2-hr oral glucose tolerance test after fasting overnight. GDM was diagnosed when ≥1 plasma glucose (PG) test result was abnormal according to the IADPSG criteria (FPG ≥92 mg/dL, PG 1-hr 180mg/L, PG 2-hr 153 mg/dL). Data analysis was with Epi-InfoTM version 3.5.4. Associations were analyzed with the Pearson's chi squared and Fischer's exact test where appropriate. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

The prevalence of GDM was 20.5% and respondents' mean age was 27.8 (SD 5.7) years. Majority, 13.5% participants had abnormal FPG alone, while 3.5% had any two abnormal values. GDM was associated with: advanced maternal age (OR 3.4: 95% CI 1.7-7.0; P<0.001), BMI≥30 kg/m2 (OR 6.2 : 95% CI 2.9-13.1, P<0.001), past history of unexplained stillbirth (OR 5.7: 95% CI 2.5-12.9, P<0.001) and history of macrosomia (OR 8.5:95% CI 3.8-19, P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

With the high prevalence of GDM, identification of its associated factors has the potential to be a target of intervention to prevent poor obstetrical outcomes.

The World Health Organization (WHO) versus The International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Group (IADPSG) diagnostic criteria of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and their associated maternal and neonatal outcomes

Background Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a common medical complication in pregnancy. The aim of this study was to compare the prevalence of GDM using the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria and the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Group (IADPSG) criteria in our population. We further compared the incidence of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes in women diagnosed with GDM using these criteria and determined whether the IADPSG criteria is suitable in our population. Methods This randomized controlled trial was conducted at our antenatal clinic involving 520 patients from 1st February 2015 until 30th September 2017. They were randomized into the WHO and the IADPSG groups. All eligible women underwent a standard oral glucose tolerance test with 75 g glucose, their fasting and 2 h post prandial glucose levels were taken. The primary outcome was the prevalence of GDM. The secondary outcomes were the incidence of primary cesarean section, gestational hypertension or preeclampsia, preterm delivery <37 weeks, fetal macrosomia, neonatal hypoglycemia and shoulder dystocia or birth injury. Results The prevalence of GDM in both groups were similar (37.9% vs. 38.6%). GDM women in the WHO group had a significantly higher incidence of gestational hypertension or preeclampsia (p = 0.004) and neonatal hypoglycemia (p = 0.042). In contrast, GDM women in the IADPSG group had a significantly higher incidence of fetal macrosomia (p = 0.027) and cesarean section (p = 0.012). Conclusion The IADPSG diagnostic criteria for GDM may not be suitable for use in our population as it resulted in women being diagnosed later and being undertreated, thus leading to adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes.

The identification and treatment of women with hyperglycaemia in pregnancy: an analysis of individual participant data, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and an economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with a higher risk of important adverse outcomes. Practice varies and the best strategy for identifying and treating GDM is unclear.

AIM

To estimate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of strategies for identifying and treating women with GDM.

METHODS

We analysed individual participant data (IPD) from birth cohorts and conducted systematic reviews to estimate the association of maternal glucose levels with adverse perinatal outcomes; GDM prevalence; maternal characteristics/risk factors for GDM; and the effectiveness and costs of treatments. The cost-effectiveness of various strategies was estimated using a decision tree model, along with a value of information analysis to assess where future research might be worthwhile. Detailed systematic searches of MEDLINE^® and MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations^®, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature Plus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Health Technology Assessment database, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, Maternity and Infant Care database and the Cochrane Methodology Register were undertaken from inception up to October 2014.

RESULTS

We identified 58 studies examining maternal glucose levels and outcome associations. Analyses using IPD alone and the systematic review demonstrated continuous linear associations of fasting and post-load glucose levels with adverse perinatal outcomes, with no clear threshold below which there is no increased risk. Using IPD, we estimated glucose thresholds to identify infants at high risk of being born large for gestational age or with high adiposity; for South Asian (SA) women these thresholds were fasting and post-load glucose levels of 5.2 mmol/l and 7.2 mmol/l, respectively and for white British (WB) women they were 5.4 and 7.5 mmol/l, respectively. Prevalence using IPD and published data varied from 1.2% to 24.2% (depending on criteria and population) and was consistently two to three times higher in SA women than in WB women. Lowering thresholds to identify GDM, particularly in women of SA origin, identifies more women at risk, but increases costs. Maternal characteristics did not accurately identify women with GDM; there was limited evidence that in some populations risk factors may be useful for identifying low-risk women. Dietary modification additional to routine care reduced the risk of most adverse perinatal outcomes. Metformin (Glucophage,^® Teva UK Ltd, Eastbourne, UK) and insulin were more effective than glibenclamide (Aurobindo Pharma - Milpharm Ltd, South Ruislip, Middlesex, UK). For all strategies to identify and treat GDM, the costs exceeded the health benefits. A policy of no screening/testing or treatment offered the maximum expected net monetary benefit (NMB) of £1184 at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). The NMB for the three best-performing strategies in each category (screen only, then treat; screen, test, then treat; and test all, then treat) ranged between -£1197 and -£1210. Further research to reduce uncertainty around potential longer-term benefits for the mothers and offspring, find ways of improving the accuracy of identifying women with GDM, and reduce costs of identification and treatment would be worthwhile.

LIMITATIONS

We did not have access to IPD from populations in the UK outside of England. Few observational studies reported longer-term associations, and treatment trials have generally reported only perinatal outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Using the national standard cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000 per QALY it is not cost-effective to routinely identify pregnant women for treatment of hyperglycaemia. Further research to provide evidence on longer-term outcomes, and more cost-effective ways to detect and treat GDM, would be valuable.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013004608.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Risk factor screening to identify women requiring oral glucose tolerance testing to diagnose gestational diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis and analysis of two pregnancy cohorts

BACKGROUND

Easily identifiable risk factors including: obesity and ethnicity at high risk of diabetes are commonly used to indicate which women should be offered the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) to diagnose gestational diabetes (GDM). Evidence regarding these risk factors is limited however. We conducted a systematic review (SR) and meta-analysis and individual participant data (IPD) analysis to evaluate the performance of risk factors in identifying women with GDM.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Medline in Process, Embase, Maternity and Infant Care and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) up to August 2016 and conducted additional reference checking. We included observational, cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies reporting the performance characteristics of risk factors used to identify women at high risk of GDM. We had access to IPD from the Born in Bradford and Atlantic Diabetes in Pregnancy cohorts, all pregnant women in the two cohorts with data on risk factors and OGTT results were included.

RESULTS

Twenty nine published studies with 211,698 women for the SR and a further 14,103 women from two birth cohorts (Born in Bradford and the Atlantic Diabetes in Pregnancy study) for the IPD analysis were included. Six studies assessed the screening performance of guidelines; six examined combinations of risk factors; eight evaluated the number of risk factors and nine examined prediction models or scores. Meta-analysis using data from published studies suggests that irrespective of the method used, risk factors do not identify women with GDM well. Using IPD and combining risk factors to produce the highest sensitivities, results in low specificities (and so higher false positives). Strategies that use the risk factors of age (>25 or >30) and BMI (>25 or 30) perform as well as other strategies with additional risk factors included.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk factor screening methods are poor predictors of which pregnant women will be diagnosed with GDM. A simple approach of offering an OGTT to women 25 years or older and/or with a BMI of 25kg/m2 or more is as good as more complex risk prediction models. Research to identify more accurate (bio)markers is needed. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO CRD42013004608.

Blood glucose screening among elderly Malaysians: Who to target?

BACKGROUND

Early detection of raised blood glucose can reduce the risk of developing diabetes. Despite being a high-risk group, a significant proportion of the elderly population does not undergo blood glucose screening. The aim of the present study was to examine the factors affecting blood glucose screening among the elderly.

METHODS

Data from a sample of 2463 respondents in the National Health and Morbidity Survey 2011 were used. Pearson Chi-squared tests were conducted to find factors associated with screening behavior. A logit model was used to analyze the likelihood of screening.

RESULTS

Income, age, education, ethnicity, employment status, availability of medical coverage, and smoking behavior were significantly associated with blood glucose screening. The likelihood of blood glucose screening was positively correlated with available monthly income and was higher in those aged 60-69 years, those attaining higher education, Malays, and elderly who are medically covered.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of the present study provide insights for health policy formulation for the elderly. As part of their efforts to reduce national health costs, governments should pay particular attention to the elderly, who are likely to be unscreened for blood glucose levels, because they face even larger risk exposure.

Diabetes in low-resourced countries

Maternal and newborn health poses one of the greatest health challenges in the developing world. Many low-income countries are now experiencing a demographic and epidemiological transition and changing of lifestyles. Thus, apparent "Western" diseases such as diabetes and obesity have been reaching the Third World countries. There is a paucity of reliable data on diabetes in pregnancy in many low-income countries. Adequate information about maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity as a consequence of diabetes in pregnancy is scarce. This chapter presents evidence of the magnitude and impact of diabetes in pregnancy. Additionally, we discuss interventions in screening and managing diabetes in pregnancy in these specific patient populations.

Homeostatic indices of insulin resistance among gestational diabetics in anticipating pregnancy complications

OBJECTIVE

This was to determine HOMA-IR score as well as to assess its association in fetal and maternal outcomes among pregnant women with diabetes risks.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study of pregnant women with diabetes risks was done. GDM was diagnosed using modified glucose tolerance test. Serum insulin was taken and measured by an electrochemiluminescence immunoassay method. Plasma glucose was measured by enzymatic reference method with hexokinase. HOMA-IR score was calculated for each patient. Maternal and fetal outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

From 279 women recruited, 22.6% had GDM with higher HOMA-IR score (4.07 ± 2.44 versus 2.08 ± 1.12; p = 0.001) and fasting insulin (16.76 ± 8.63 µIU/L versus 10.15 ± 5.07 µIU/L; p = 0.001). Area under ROC curve for HOMA-IR score was 0.79 (95% confidence interval, 0.74-0.84) with optimum cut-off value of 2.92 (sensitivity = 63.5%; specificity = 89.8%), higher than recommended by IDF (2.38). This point showed significant association with neonatal hypoglycemia (p = 0.02) and Cesarean section (p = 0.04) in GDM mothers.

CONCLUSIONS

HOMA-IR score and insulin resistance levels were higher in GDM women in our population. With the cut-off HOMA-IR value of 2.92, neonatal hypoglycemia and Cesarean section were significant complications in GDM mothers. This can be used in anticipation of maternal and fetal morbidities.

Gestational diabetes: the public health relevance and approach

The prevalence of diabetes is increasing globally and the causes attributed are the ageing population, urbanization, obesity epidemic, physical inactivity and stressful modern life. While all these factors contribute to the epidemic of DM, intra-uterine exposures and gestational programming are emerging as potential risk factors. Gestational programming is a process whereby stimuli or stresses that occur at critical or sensitive periods of foetal development, permanently change structure, physiology, and metabolism, which predispose individuals to disease in adult life. If the stimulus happens to be glucose intolerance in pregnancy, gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) manifests. Diagnosis of GDM in a woman predisposes her and her offspring for increased risk of developing glucose intolerance and obesity in the future. GDM may play a crucial role in the increasing prevalence of diabetes and obesity and hence has become a public health priority issue. There has to be an excellent coordination and cooperation between all the stake holders of health delivery care system. A great understanding of the importance of GDM and its consequences by the Government and public will go a long way in containing the epidemic of diabetes.

Diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus in Asian-Indian women

OBJECTIVE

To assess the validity of Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Group India (DIPSI) guidelines, a modified version of the WHO criterion to diagnose gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 1 463 consecutive pregnant women in the second and third trimester of pregnancy underwent 75 g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and 2-h plasma glucose (PG) was measured by the glucose oxidase-peroxidase (GOD-POD) method. GDM was diagnosed with 2-h PG ≥ 7.8 mmol/L (WHO criteria) and the rest were classified as normal glucose tolerant (NGT) women. GDM women were advised medical nutrition therapy (MNT) for two weeks. Those who failed to reach the target glycemic level of FPG < 5.0 mmol/L and 2-h PG < 6.67 mmol/L with MNT were advised insulin. All of them were followed throughout pregnancy until delivery. Birth weight of 90th percentile (> 3.45 kg) in the neonates was considered as macrosomia (primary outcome).

RESULTS

The mean maternal age and body mass index were 23.60±3.32 years and 21.5±4.06 kg/m(2) respectively. The mean gestational age was 27.9±5.56 weeks. DIPSI criterion identified 196 women (13.4%) as GDM and the rest as NGT. Insulin was required in 19 (9.7%) women with GDM. Macrosomia was observed in 9.9% GDM women with intervention and 9.8% in NGT (P = 1.000).

CONCLUSION

DIPSI criterion is a one step-cost effective and evidence-based procedure to diagnose GDM in any socio-economic setting.

Gestational diabetes mellitus in primigravidae: a mild disease

This prospective observational study was done to analyse the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) among primigravidae and its outcome. All healthy primigravidae with singleton pregnancies were offered universal glucose tolerance testing between 16 and 28 weeks gestation. GDM and non GDM groups were managed according to hospital protocol. The antenatal features and pregnancy outcomes were analysed. Out of 616 primigravidae, 113 (18.34%) were GDM with slightly older (27.9 +/- 4.2 versus 26.32 +/- 3.3, p < 0.001) age. The mean fasting and two hours postprandial blood glucose in both groups were 4.99 +/- 1.08 mmol/l, 8.86 +/- 1.41 mmol/l(GDM) and 4.36 +/- 0.43 mmol/l, 5.71 +/- 1.11 mmol/l (Non GDM), respectively. Maternal family history of diabetes mellitus, weight exceeding 80 Kg, polyhydramnios (2.65% versus 0.2%, p = 0.028) and neonatal hyperbilirubinaemia (9.73% versus 2.98%, p = 0.01) occurred significantly more frequent in the GDM group compared to normal. There was no significant difference in other pregnancy outcomes and complications between the two groups. In conclusion GDM in primigravidae was detected at a relatively young age with more frequent maternal family history of DM, weight exceeding 80 Kg, polyhydromnions and neonatal hyperbilirubinaemia. The degree of disease was mild and treatment led to no significant complication.

Evaluating the extent of pregravid risk factors of gestational diabetes mellitus in women in tehran

BACKGROUND

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with maternal and fetal complications. Specific outcomes in previous pregnancies are considered as risk factors for GDM in the consecutive pregnancies. The aim of this study was to evaluate the pregravid risk factors of GDM in multigravid women.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cross sectional study on 114 multigravid women with GDM without previous history of diabetes and compared them with non-diabetic controls. We used modified criteria of Carpenter and Coustan for screening. Risk factors were obtained from medical records of individuals.

RESULTS

We found that women of 26 years and older who had previous neonates with birth weight more than 3800 gram and those affected with hypothyroidism or chronic hypertension were at risk for GDM. The difference of the number of preterm birth in GDM women and healthy controls was statistically significant (p=0.05). There was no significant difference between the numbers of pregnancies, parity, previous fetal and neonatal death and abortion number between patients and the control group.

CONCLUSION

Our results show that maternal age over 26 years, birth weight of previous neonate more than 3800 g, hypothyroidism, chronic hypertension and probably history of preterm birth are significant risk factors for GDM.

Prepregnancy BMI and the risk of gestational diabetes: a systematic review of the literature with meta-analysis

The objective of this study is to assess and quantify the risk for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) according to prepregnancy maternal body mass index (BMI). The design is a systematic review of observational studies published in the last 30 years. Four electronic databases were searched for publications (1977-2007). BMI was elected as the only measure of obesity, and all diagnostic criteria for GDM were accepted. Studies with selective screening for GDM were excluded. There were no language restrictions. The methodological quality of primary studies was assessed. Some 1745 citations were screened, and 70 studies (two unpublished) involving 671 945 women were included (59 cohorts and 11 case-controls). Most studies were of high or medium quality. Compared with women with a normal BMI, the unadjusted pooled odds ratio (OR) of an underweight woman developing GDM was 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69 to 0.82). The OR for overweight, moderately obese and morbidly obese women were 1.97 (95% CI 1.77 to 2.19), 3.01 (95% CI 2.34 to 3.87) and 5.55 (95% CI 4.27 to 7.21) respectively. For every 1 kg m(-2) increase in BMI, the prevalence of GDM increased by 0.92% (95% CI 0.73 to 1.10). The risk of GDM is positively associated with prepregnancy BMI. This information is important when counselling women planning a pregnancy.

[Comparison of two routine screening strategies for gestational diabetes mellitus: the experience of Jean-Verdier Hospital]

OBJECTIVE

Screening strategies for gestational diabetes mellitus are controversial. Thus, we sought to determine the benefits of universal screening.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Prospective study with 2121 women involved but 1610 really screened (75.9%). According to WHO's recommendations, the strategy implemented was one-step, universal screening with a 75g oral glucose tolerance test. Screening was performed between 24 and 28 weeks of gestation or earlier if risk factors were identified. Results were compared to previous year (2001) then only a selective screening was done.

RESULTS

Application of universal screening increased the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (8.39% to 15.65%). Out of the 252 patients with gestational diabetes, 66 did not display any identified risk factor (26.19%). Some new risk factors have been identified: age>30, Asian, Indian or Pakistan ethnies. If these new risk factors were applied, this super selective screening would have a sensibility of 96%.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Universal screening seems to be the most appropriate routine screening strategy because it is difficult to know exactly the specific risk factors of a population to do a super selective screening.

False-Positive 1-Hour Glucose Challenge Test and Adverse Perinatal Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether a false-positive 1-hour glucose challenge test (GCT) is associated with perinatal complications.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of 1825 eligible pregnant women among a cohort of 1998 patients. Patients were screened for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) with the 1-hour 50-g GCT at 24-28 gestational weeks. A false-positive GCT was defined as a result greater than or equal to 135 mg/dL followed by a normal 3-hour glucose tolerance test (GTT). We compared the negative GCT and false-positive GCT cohorts for a composite perinatal outcome variable that included fetal macrosomia, antenatal death, shoulder dystocia, chorioamnionitis, preeclampsia, intensive care nursery admission, and postpartum endometritis. Secondary outcomes included cesarean delivery and each component variable of the composite. Unadjusted, stratified, and multiple logistic regression analyses were used to investigate the association between a false-positive GCT and the development of perinatal complications.

RESULTS

We identified 164 patients with a false-positive GCT and 50 patients with GDM. The false-positive GCT cohort on average was older, of higher parity, had a higher body mass index, and more frequently had chronic hypertension, sickle cell trait, and elevated midtrimester human chorionic gonadotropin levels. The false-positive GCT cohort more frequently had adverse perinatal outcomes, including the composite perinatal outcome (odds ratio [OR] 5.96, 95% confidence interval[CI]1.47,24.16), macrosomia greater than 4500 g (OR 3.66, 95% CI 1.30, 10.32), antenatal death (OR 4.61, 95% CI 0.77, 27.48), shoulder dystocia (OR 2.85, 95% CI 1.25, 6.51), endometritis (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.03, 4.63), and cesarean delivery (OR 1.76, 95% CI 0.99, 3.14).

CONCLUSION

A false-positive GCT is an independent risk factor for adverse perinatal outcomes.