Timing of delivery in women with diabetes: A population-based study

Multicentre double-blind randomised placebo-controlled four-arm trial to assess the effect of oral sodium bicarbonate and intravenous hyoscine butylbromide on spontaneous delivery after induction of labour in nulliparous women: protocol for the Safe Induction of Labour Trial (SAINT)

INTRODUCTION

Presently, more than one in four births in high-income countries undergo labour induction. Induction of labour is an independent risk factor for adverse obstetric outcomes, including high rates of operative delivery. Two drugs, hyoscine butylbromide and sodium bicarbonate, have been used in labour to facilitate cervical dilation and prevent uterine lactate accumulation. However, no previous randomised trial has systematically studied the separate and combined effects of these drugs in women with induction of labour.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The Safe Induction of Labour Trial (SAINT) study will assess the efficacy of oral sodium bicarbonate and intravenous hyoscine butylbromide on facilitating spontaneous (ie, non-operative) delivery in nulliparous participants with induction of labour. We present a 2×2 factorial design where three active treatment arms are compared with double-placebo. Participants are recruited at 10 delivery departments across Norway. Treatment will start on diagnosis of established labour with a maximum of three consecutive doses 4 hours apart. Approximately 5100 women will be screened to achieve 3000 participants randomly assigned to study intervention.

STATISTICAL ANALYSES

The primary outcome of spontaneous delivery will be analysed using binary logistic regression. Results will be presented as marginal adjusted risk differences between each of the three active treatment groups and the double-placebo group.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The SAINT study is approved by the Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics, the European Union Clinical Trials Information System, the Norwegian Medical Products Agency and Institutional Review Boards. Results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and communications to congresses.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Clinical Trials: NCT05719467. EudraCT/EUCT: 2021-000392-37/2024-511848-55-00.

Procedural abortion, provider-initiated preterm delivery and survival in pregnant people with cancer: A population-based cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether procedural-induced abortion or provider-initiated preterm delivery are associated with improved survival in pregnant people with cancer.

DESIGN

Retrospective population-based cohort study.

SETTING

Provinces of Alberta and Ontario, Canada, 2003-2016.

POPULATION

Females aged 18-50 years diagnosed with cancer at <20 weeks' (for the assessment of procedural-induced abortion) or <37 weeks' gestation (for the assessment of provider-initiated delivery).

METHODS

Cox proportional hazard models assessed all-cause mortality in relation to procedural-induced abortion and provider-initiated preterm delivery, adjusting for cancer site, stage at diagnosis and age. Meta-analysis pooled the results across both provinces.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

All cause mortality.

RESULTS

There were 512 pregnant people diagnosed with cancer at <20 weeks' gestation and 782 diagnosed with cancer at <37 weeks' gestation. Neither procedural-induced abortion (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 1.39, 95% CI: 0.32-6.17) nor provider-initiated preterm delivery (aHR = 1.17, 95% CI: 0.76-1.81) were associated with improved survival following adjustment for age, stage at diagnosis and cancer site.

CONCLUSIONS

Neither procedural-induced abortion nor provider-initiated preterm birth was associated with improved survival in pregnant people diagnosed with cancer; however, these obstetric interventions are highly personal decisions best decided by the pregnant person in consultation with their care providers.

Large for Gestational Age and Adverse Outcomes: Stratified By Diabetes Status

OBJECTIVE

 To examine the association of adverse outcomes among parturients with large for gestational age (LGA; birth weight ≥ 90th) newborns, stratified by diabetes status. Additionally, we described the temporal trends of adverse outcomes among LGA neonates.

STUDY DESIGN

 This retrospective cohort study used the U.S. Vital Statistics dataset between 2014 and 2020. The inclusion criteria were singleton, nonanomalous LGA live births who labored and delivered at 24 to 41 weeks with known diabetes status. The coprimary outcomes were composite neonatal adverse outcomes of the following: Apgar score < 5 at 5 minutes, assisted ventilation > 6 hours, seizure, or neonatal or infant mortality, and maternal adverse outcomes of the following: maternal transfusion, ruptured uterus, unplanned hysterectomy, admission to intensive care unit, or unplanned procedure. Multivariable Poisson regression models were used to estimate adjusted relative risks (aRR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Average annual percent change (AAPC) was calculated to assess changes in rates of LGA and morbidity over time.

RESULTS

 Of 27 million births in 7 years, 1,843,467 (6.8%) met the inclusion criteria. While 1,656,888 (89.9%) did not have diabetes, 186,579 (10.1%) were with diabetes. Composite neonatal adverse outcomes (aRR = 1.48, 95% CI = 1.43, 1.52) and composite maternal adverse outcomes (aRR = 1.37, 95% CI = 1.36, 1.38) were significantly higher among individuals with diabetes, compared with those without diabetes. From 2014 to 2020, the LGA rate was stable among people without diabetes. However, there was a downward trend of LGA in people with diabetes (AAPC = - 2.4, 95% CI = - 3.5, -1.4).

CONCLUSION

 In pregnancies with LGA newborns, composite neonatal and maternal morbidities were higher in those with diabetes, compared with those without diabetes.

KEY POINTS

· Large for gestational age stratified by diabetes status.. · Composite neonatal and maternal adverse outcomes are worse among individuals with diabetes as compared to those without.. · During 2014 to 2020, the trend of LGA in individuals without diabetes increased..

Factors Affecting Mode of Birth in Women With Preexisting Diabetes and Gestational Diabetes: A Retrospective Cohort at a Tertiary Referral Center

Women with preexisting diabetes and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are at higher risk for adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. However, there is no consensus on a uniform approach regarding mode of birth (MOB) for all forms of diabetes. The aim of the study is to compare MOB in women with preexisting diabetes and GDM and possible factors influencing it. A retrospective cohort study of women with GDM and preexisting diabetes between 2015 and 2021 at a tertiary referral center was conducted. One thousand three hundred eighty-five singleton pregnancies were included. One thousand twenty-two (74.4%) women had a vaginal birth (VB) and 351 (25.6%) a caesarean section. Preexisting diabetes was significantly associated with caesarean section compared to GDM (OR 2.43). Five hundred fifty-one (40.1%) women underwent induction of labor, and 122 (22.1%) women had a secondary caesarean after IOL. Women induced due to spontaneous rupture of membrane (SROM) achieved the highest rate of VB at 93%. The lowest rates of VB occurred if indication for induction was for preeclampsia or hypertension. IOL was significantly less successful in preexisting diabetes with a VB achieved in 56.4% for type 1 diabetes and 52.6% of type 2 diabetes compared to GDM (78.2% in GDM; 81.2% in IGDM; OR 3.25, 95% CI 1.70-6.19, p < 0.001). The rate of VB was higher who were induced preterm compared to women with term IOL (n = 240 (81.9%) vs. n = 199 (73.2%); p < 0.05). Parity, previous VB and SROM favored VB after IOL, whereas preexisting diabetes, hypertension, and IOL after 40 + 0 weeks are independent risk factors for caesarean delivery.

Improving maternal and neonatal outcomes for women with gestational diabetes through continuity of midwifery care: A cross-sectional study

PROBLEM

Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM) is a complication of pregnancy which may exclude women from midwife-led models of care.

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of research evaluating the safety and feasibility of continuity of midwifery care (CoMC) for women with GDM.

AIM

To investigate the impact of CoMC on maternal and neonatal outcomes, for otherwise low-risk women with GDM.

METHODS

This exploratory cross-sectional study observed maternal and neonatal outcomes including onset of labour, augmentation, labour analgesia, mode of birth, perineal trauma, gestation at birth, shoulder dystocia, infant birth weight, neonatal feeding at discharge.

FINDINGS

Participants were 287 otherwise low-risk pregnant women, who developed GDM, and either received CoMC (n=36) or standard hospital maternity care (non-CoMC) (n=251). Women with GDM who received CoMC were significantly more likely to experience an spontaneous onset of labour (OR 6.3; 95% CI 2.7-14.5; p<.001), labour without an epidural (OR 4.2; 95% CI 2.0 - 9.2,<0.001) and exclusively breastfeed (OR 4.3; 95% CI 1.26 - 14.32; p=0.02).

DISCUSSION

Receiving CoMC may be a public health initiative which not only improves maternal and neonatal outcomes, but also long-term morbidity associated with GDM.

CONCLUSION

Findings provide preliminary evidence suggesting CoMC improves maternal and neonatal outcomes and is likely a safe and viable option for otherwise low-risk women with GDM. Larger studies are recommended to confirm findings and explore the full impact of CoMC for women with GDM.

Antepartum Fetal Surveillance and Optimal Timing of Delivery in Diabetic Women: A Narrative Review

Antepartum fetal surveillance (AFS) is essential for pregnant women with diabetes to mitigate the risk of stillbirth. However, there is still no universal consensus on the optimal testing method, testing frequency, and delivery timing. This review aims to comprehensively analyze the evidence concerning AFS and the most advantageous timing for delivery in both gestational and pregestational diabetes mellitus cases. This review's methodology involved an extensive literature search encompassing international diabetes guidelines and scientific databases, including PubMed, MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and Scopus. The review process meticulously identified and utilized pertinent articles for analysis. Within the scope of this review, a thorough examination revealed five prominent international guidelines predominantly addressing gestational diabetes. These guidelines discuss the utility and timing of fetal well-being assessments and recommendations for optimal pregnancy resolution timing. However, the scarcity of clinical trials directly focused on this subject led to a reliance on observational studies as the basis for most recommendations. Glucose control, maternal comorbidities, and the medical management received are crucial in making decisions regarding AFS and determining the appropriate delivery timing.

Neonatal outcomes and rationale for timing of birth in perinatal diabetes: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends delivery in the 39th week of pregnancy for patients with pregestational and medication-controlled gestational diabetes with consideration for earlier delivery among those with poor glucose control.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate the impact of birth before 39 weeks' gestation exclusively for diabetes-related indications on neonatal outcomes and clinician rationale for these recommendations.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study of all singleton, nonanomalous pregnancies complicated by diabetes. Patients were identified through an obstetrical database containing information of 90,185 births from 2011 to 2021. Patients who delivered in a given week of gestation exclusively for diabetes-related indications were compared with ongoing pregnancies. Recommended births for other obstetrical indications were excluded from the diabetes-related indications cohorts. The primary outcome was neonatal intensive care unit admission. Secondary outcomes included neonatal intensive care unit length of stay, stillbirth, neonatal death, hypoglycemia, respiratory distress syndrome, and shoulder dystocia. For all births before 39 weeks' gestation, the electronic medical records were reviewed to confirm the rationale for the intervention for a diabetes-indicated condition.

RESULTS

From the 90,185 recorded births that occurred in 2011 to 2021, 4750 patients with diabetes were identified. Of those, 30.5% (n=1449) had a recommended birth for a diabetes-related indications with 2.2% of those (n=32) occurring at 36 weeks' gestation, 7.9% (n=114) at 37 weeks' gestation, 9.7% (n=141) at 38 weeks' gestation, and 63.0% (n=913) at 39 weeks' gestation. Births that occurred at 36 and 37 weeks' gestation exclusively for diabetes-related indications had higher rates of neonatal intensive care unit admission than the respective ongoing pregnancies (62.5% vs 8.7%; P<.001 and 25.4% vs 7.2%; P<.001). There was no difference in neonatal intensive care unit admission for births at 38 or 39 weeks' gestation when compared with ongoing pregnancy. For neonates born at 36 and 37 weeks' gestation in comparison with ongoing pregnancies, the median neonatal intensive care unit length of stay was 11.0 vs 2.8 days, (P<.001) and 4.4 vs 2.6 days (P=.026), respectively. There were significantly increased rates of neonatal hypoglycemia and respiratory distress syndrome among births that occurred at 36, 37, and 38 weeks' gestation when compared with ongoing pregnancies. There were no differences in the rate of stillbirth in this cohort. Primary factors cited for early birth were poor glycemic control (71.4%), recommendation by a maternal-fetal medicine specialist (38.7%), and suspected fetal macrosomia (27.9%). Overall, 46.7%, 32.8%, and 20.6% of patients had 1, 2, or ≥3 indications, respectively, listed as rationale for early birth. Overall, few objective measures were used to recommend birth before 39 weeks' gestation owing to diabetes.

CONCLUSION

In pregnancies complicated by diabetes, early birth exclusively for diabetes-related indications was associated with increased neonatal intensive care unit admission and length of stay and with neonatal morbidity. Little objective data are documented by clinicians to support their recommendations for early birth associated with diabetes. Additional clinical guidelines are needed to define suboptimal glucose control necessitating birth before 39 weeks' gestation.

Management of type 2 diabetes in pregnancy: a narrative review

The prevalence of type 2 diabetes (T2DM) at reproductive age is rising. Women with T2DM have a similarly high risk for pregnancy complications as pregnant women with type 1 diabetes. To reduce adverse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes, such as preeclampsia and preterm delivery, a multi-target approach is necessary. Tight glycemic control together with appropriate gestational weight gain, lifestyle measures, and if necessary, antihypertensive treatment and low-dose aspirin is advised. This narrative review discusses the latest evidence on preconception care, management of diabetes-related complications, lifestyle counselling, recommendations on gestational weight gain, pharmacologic treatment and early postpartum management of T2DM.

Risk of Stillbirth in Pregnancies Complicated by Diabetes, Stratified by Fetal Growth

OBJECTIVE

To compare stillbirth rates per week of expectant management stratified by birth weight in pregnancies complicated by gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) or pregestational diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

A national population-based retrospective cohort study of singleton, nonanomalous pregnancies complicated by pregestational diabetes or GDM was performed using national birth and death certificate data from 2014 to 2017. Stillbirth rates per 10,000 patients (stillbirth incidence at gestational age week/ongoing pregnancies-[0.5×live births at gestational age week]) were determined for each week of pregnancy from 34 to 39 completed weeks of gestation. Pregnancies were stratified by birth weight, categorized as having small-for-gestational-age (SGA), appropriate-for-gestational-age (AGA), or large-for-gestational-age (LGA) fetuses, assigned by sex-based Fenton criteria. Relative risk (RR) and 95% CI for stillbirth were calculated for each gestational age week compared with the GDM-related AGA group.

RESULTS

We included 834,631 pregnancies complicated by either GDM (86.9%) or pregestational diabetes (13.1%) in the analysis, with a total of 3,033 stillbirths. Stillbirth rates increased with advancing gestational age for pregnancies complicated by both GDM and pregestational diabetes regardless of birth weight. Compared with pregnancies with AGA fetuses, those with both SGA and LGA fetuses were significantly associated with an increased risk of stillbirth at all gestational ages. Ongoing pregnancies at 37 weeks of gestation complicated by pregestational diabetes with LGA or SGA fetuses had respective stillbirth rates of 64.9 and 40.1 per 10,000 patients. Pregnancies complicated by pregestational diabetes had an RR of stillbirth of 21.8 (95% CI 17.4-27.2) for LGA fetuses and 13.5 (95% CI 8.5-21.2) for SGA fetuses compared with GDM-related AGA at 37 weeks of gestation. The greatest absolute risk of stillbirth was in pregnancies complicated by pregestational diabetes at 39 weeks of gestation with LGA fetuses (97/10,000).

CONCLUSION

Pregnancies complicated by both GDM and pregestational diabetes affected by pathologic fetal growth have an increased risk of stillbirth with advancing gestational age. This risk is significantly higher with pregestational diabetes, especially pregestational diabetes with LGA fetuses.

Gestational diabetes mellitus: The optimal time of delivery

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a common pregnancy complication strongly associated with poor maternal-fetal outcomes. Its incidence and prevalence have been increasing in recent years. Women with GDM typically give birth through either vaginal delivery or cesarean section, and the maternal-fetal outcomes are related to several factors such as cervical level, fetal lung maturity, the level of glycemic control still present, and the mode of treatment for the condition. We categorized women with GDM based on the latter two factors. GDM that is managed without medication when it is responsive to nutrition- and exercise-based therapy is considered diet- and exercise-controlled GDM, or class A1 GDM, and GDM managed with medication to achieve adequate glycemic control is considered class A2 GDM. The remaining cases in which neither medical nor nutritional treatment can control glucose levels or patients who do not control their blood sugar are categorized as class A3 GDM. We investigated the optimal time of delivery for women with GDM according to the classification of the condition. This review aimed to address the benefits and harms of giving birth at different weeks of gestation for women with different classes of GDM and attempted to provide an analytical framework and clearer advice on the optimal time for labor.

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.

Non-diabetic fetal macrosomia: outcomes of elective delivery versus expectant management

Background

Macrosomia in the absence of diabetes can be associated with increased neonatal and maternal morbidity. Management is usually undertaken on a case-by-case basis.

Aims

In order to inform local practice, this study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of the management of non-diabetic macrosomia in an Irish tertiary center.

Methods

A retrospective observational study was performed on all women with estimated fetal weight over 4000 g after 37 weeks’ gestation. Maternal demographics and obstetric and neonatal outcomes were recorded using the hospital information system. Women with diabetes, previous caesarean section, non-cephalic presentation, or any other complicating condition were excluded. Women were divided into two groups:

Active management: Elective delivery for macrosomia—between 38 + 0 and 40 + 6 weeks’ gestation

Expectant management: with induction of labour offered after 41 weeks' gestation

Results

There were 397 women included, 188 with active and 209 with expectant management. There was no difference in adverse neonatal outcomes, major maternal morbidity, or mode of delivery, after exclusion of pre-labor caesarean section. Women with expectant management were more likely to go into spontaneous labor (46.9 vs 1.6%, p < 0.001) and to have a favorable cervix at the onset of induction of labor if nulliparous (86.1 vs 70.0%, p = 0.021), but have higher rates of episiotomy (28.6 vs 18.2%, p = 0.021). With active management, nulliparas with an unfavorable cervix had increased risk of anal sphincter injury (6.5 vs 0.0%, p = 0.007) and postpartum hemorrhage (59.0 vs 35.5%, p = 0.003).

Conclusions

Overall, there was no difference in major maternal or neonatal outcomes between management options for fetal macrosomia. However, inducing nulliparas with an unfavorable cervix for non-diabetic macrosomia was associated with obstetric anal sphincter injury and postpartum hemorrhage.

Predictors of a successful vaginal delivery in women with type 1 diabetes: a retrospective analysis of 20 years

PURPOSE

To evaluate the independent factors associated with the success of a trial of vaginal birth (TVB) in women with type 1 diabetes. Despite all therapeutic efforts and technological innovations, rates of caesarean sections (CS) in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes remain unchanged above 60%. Our aim was to point out influencing factors to improve the quality of antepartum counseling.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of 195 pregnancies with type 1 diabetes treated between 2000 and 2019. After exclusions, 118 women with near-term singleton pregnancies intended vaginal birth (TVB). Group differences between CS and successful vaginal delivery were analyzed. Multivariate logistic regression was performed by including clinical and metabolic variables to determine the independent effects on a successful vaginal delivery. Subgroup analysis for nulliparous women.

RESULTS

Of 118 women with TVB, 67 (56.8%) were delivered vaginally. History of previous vaginal delivery (OR 10.29; CI 2.39; 44.30), HbA1c changes during pregnancy (per % increase; OR 0.59; CI 0.36; 0.96) and gestational weight gain (per kg; OR 0.87; CI 0.80; 0.96) were independent predictors for a successful vaginal delivery. In nulliparous women, the duration of diabetes was independently and negatively associated with vaginal delivery.

CONCLUSION

Provided data can help to improve antepartum counseling in type 1 diabetic patients. It seems that women with type 1 diabetes should avoid postponing pregnancy and childbirth.

Optimal timing of labour induction in contemporary clinical practice

Induction of labour (IoL) is generally conducted when maternal and foetal risks of remaining pregnant outweigh the risks of delivery. With emerging literature around non-medically indicated IoL, contemporary clinical practice has seen an increase in IoL at 39 weeks' gestation. This review highlights recent evidence on the most common indications for IoL including gestational diabetes, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy, and post-term pregnancies. It also summarizes the evidence related to the timing of IoL for other common conditions based on recent literature reviews.

Evaluation of the relationship between placental stiffness measured by shear wave elastography and perinatal outcomes in women with gestational diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Recently, studies on placental elastography in high-risk pregnancies continue to increase. The shear wave technique can contribute to the management of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and improve perinatal outcomes by measuring placental stiffness.Purpose: To evaluate the relationship between placental stiffness measured by shear wave elastography (SWE) and perinatal outcomes in women with GDM.Material and Methods: This prospective cross-sectional study was conducted at our hospital between March and October 2020. The participants were divided into three groups: GDM-A1 group (regulated by dietary modifications); GDM-A2 group (needed pharmacologic treatment); and low-risk pregnancy (LRP) group. Both SWE and shear wave velocity (SWV) were measured in the placenta during pregnancy.

RESULTS

In total, 111 women were included in the study. The mean SWE (kPa) values for the GDM-A1, GDM-A2, and LRP groups were 10.4 (range 3.1-23.3), 13 (range 4.3-29.6), and 8.3 (range 3.2-15.1), respectively. The mean HbA1c and fasting glucose values of diabetes groups showed strongly positive correlation with mean SWE and SWV values (P < 0.001, r=0.875; P < 0.001, r=0.856; P < 0.001, r=0.791; P < 0.001, r=0.740), respectively. The SWE values of central maternal and fetal surfaces of the placenta (P=0.01, r=0.242; P < 0.001, r=0.333) showed a moderately positive correlation with admission to the neonatal intensive care unit.

CONCLUSION

Placental stiffness has increased in the GDM-A2 group when compared to the GDM-A1 and LRP groups. We also observed a strong positive correlation between HbA1c, fasting glucose values, and increased elasticity values in diabetic patients with metabolic dysregulation that may have clinical value.

Maternal and Fetal Outcomes in Women with Diabetes in Pregnancy Treated before and after the Introduction of a Standardized Multidisciplinary Management Protocol

BACKGROUND

Diabetes in pregnancy is associated with an increased risk to the woman and to the developing fetus. Currently, there is no consensus on the optimal management strategies for the follow-up and the timing of delivery of pregnancies affected by gestational and pregestational diabetes, with different international guidelines suggesting different management options.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study from January 2017 to January 2021, to compare maternal and neonatal outcomes of pregnancies complicated by gestational and pregestational diabetes, followed-up and delivered in a third level referral center before and after the introduction of a standardized multidisciplinary management protocol including diagnostic, screening, and management criteria.

RESULTS

Of the 131 women included, 55 were managed before the introduction of the multidisciplinary management protocol and included in group 1 (preprotocol), while 76 were managed according to the newly introduced multidisciplinary protocol and included in group 2 (after protocol). We observed an increase in the rates of vaginal delivery, rising from 32.7% to 64.5% (<0.001), and the rate of successful induction of labor improved from 28.6% to 86.2% (P < 0.001). No differences were found in neonatal outcomes, and the only significant difference was demonstrated for the rates of fetal macrosomia (20% versus 5.3%, P: 0.012). Therefore, the improvements observed in the maternal outcomes did not impact negatively on fetal and neonatal outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The introduction of a standardized multidisciplinary management protocol led to an improvement in the rates of vaginal delivery and in the rate of successful induction of labor in our center. A strong cooperation between obstetricians, diabetologists, and neonatologists is crucial to obtain a successful outcome in women with diabetes in pregnancy.

Metformin versus insulin use for treatment of gestational diabetes and delivery by caesarean section: A nationwide Swedish cohort study

OBJECTIVE

Pregnant women who develop gestational diabetes (GDM) are more likely to deliver by caesarean section (CS). Over the last decade, the use of metformin has increased as an alternative to insulin but it's unknown how this shift in treatment has influenced the mode of delivery. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the association between metformin use and CS and delivery of a large-for-gestational age (LGA) infant compared to insulin use for GDM.

STUDY DESIGN

The Swedish population health registers were linked to identify pregnant women from 2012 to 2016 without preexisting diabetes and with a first filled prescription of insulin or metformin in trimester 2 or 3 (n = 2467), categorized into those treated with insulin only (88%), metformin only (7.6%), or both insulin and metformin (4.3%). Logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Analyses were adjusted for relevant covariates and stratified by history of CS.

RESULTS

The proportion of women using metformin to treat GDM increased from 2.5% in 2012 to over 30% in 2016. Comparing insulin only to metformin only use, no association with delivery by CS (adjusted OR 0.79, 95% CI; 0.54-1.16) and lower odds of delivering a LGA infant (adjusted OR 0.44, 95% CI; 0.26-0.76) was found. Treatment with both insulin and metformin was associated with an increased risk of CS (adjusted OR 1.65, 95% CI; 1.06-2.56), which were more often unplanned. Estimates were further elevated in nulliparous (adjusted OR 2.32, 95% CI; 0.95-5.65) and multiparous women with a history of CS (adjusted OR 2.29, 95% CI; 0.60-8.74) but conclusions could not be drawn given the wide CIs.

CONCLUSION

There was no evidence of a higher association of metformin use alone with CS compared to insulin use for treatment of GDM but a protective effect for delivery of a LGA infant was shown. Women requiring treatment with both insulin and metformin had increased odds for delivery by CS which in turn may indicate that the need for the use of both medications to treat GDM suggests a pregnancy at higher risk.

Timing of delivery in women with diabetes: A population-based study

INTRODUCTION

Women with diabetes, and their infants, have an increased risk of adverse events due to excess fetal growth. Earlier delivery, when fetuses are smaller, may reduce these risks. This study aimed to evaluate the week-specific risks of maternal and neonatal morbidity/mortality to assist with obstetrical decision making.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this population-based cohort study, women with type 1 diabetes (n = 5889), type 2 diabetes (n = 9422) and gestational diabetes (n = 138 917) and a comparison group without diabetes (n = 2 553 243) who delivered a singleton infant at ≥36 completed weeks of gestation between 2004 and 2014 were identified from the Canadian Institute of Health Information Discharge Abstract Database. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine the week-specific rates of severe maternal and neonatal morbidity/mortality among women delivered iatrogenically vs those undergoing expectant management.

RESULTS

For all women, the absolute risk of severe maternal morbidity/mortality was low, typically impacting less than 1% of women, and there was no significant difference in gestational age-specific severe maternal morbidity/mortality between iatrogenic delivery and expectant management among women with any form of diabetes. Among women with gestational diabetes, iatrogenic delivery was associated with an increased risk of neonatal morbidity/mortality compared with expectant management at 36 and 37 weeks' gestation (76.7 and 27.8 excess cases per 1000 deliveries, respectively) and a lower risk of neonatal morbidity/mortality at 38, 39 and 40 weeks' gestation (7.9, 27.3 and 15.9 fewer cases per 1000 deliveries, respectively). Increased risks of severe neonatal morbidity following iatrogenic delivery compared with expectant management were also observed for women with type 1 diabetes at 36 (98.3 excess cases per 1000 deliveries) and 37 weeks' gestation (44.5 excess cases per 1000 deliveries) and for women with type 2 diabetes at 36 weeks' gestation (77.9 excess cases per 1000 deliveries) weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical decision regarding timing of delivery is complex and contingent on maternal-fetal wellbeing, including adequate glycemic control. This study suggests that delivery at 38, 39 or 40 weeks' gestation may optimize neonatal outcomes among women with diabetes.