Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
País/Região como assunto
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Diabetes Obes Metab ; 20(8): 1894-1902, 2018 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29603547

RESUMO

AIM: Diabetes is associated with a high risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. Optimal glycaemic control is fundamental and is traditionally monitored with self-measured glucose profiles and periodic HbA1c measurements. We investigated the effectiveness of additional use of retrospective continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in diabetic pregnancies. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed a nationwide multicentre, open label, randomized, controlled trial to study pregnant women with type 1 or type 2 diabetes who were undergoing insulin therapy at gestational age < 16 weeks, or women who were undergoing insulin treatment for gestational diabetes at gestational age < 30 weeks. Women were randomly allocated (1:1) to intermittent use of retrospective CGM or to standard treatment. Glycaemic control was assessed by CGM for 5-7 days every 6 weeks in the CGM group, while self-monitoring of blood glucose and HbA1c measurements were applied in both groups. Primary outcome was macrosomia, defined as birth weight above the 90th percentile. Secondary outcomes were glycaemic control and maternal and neonatal complications. RESULTS: Between July 2011 and September 2015, we randomized 300 pregnant women with type 1 (n = 109), type 2 (n = 82) or with gestational (n = 109) diabetes to either CGM (n = 147) or standard treatment (n = 153). The incidence of macrosomia was 31.0% in the CGM group and 28.4% in the standard treatment group (relative risk [RR], 1.06; 95% CI, 0.83-1.37). HbA1c levels were similar between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: In diabetic pregnancy, use of intermittent retrospective CGM did not reduce the risk of macrosomia. CGM provides detailed information concerning glycaemic fluctuations but, as a treatment strategy, does not translate into improved pregnancy outcome.


Assuntos
Glicemia/análise , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/sangue , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/sangue , Diabetes Gestacional/sangue , Macrossomia Fetal/prevenção & controle , Monitorização Ambulatorial , Gravidez em Diabéticas/sangue , Adulto , Terapia Combinada , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/fisiopatologia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/terapia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/fisiopatologia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/terapia , Diabetes Gestacional/fisiopatologia , Diabetes Gestacional/terapia , Feminino , Macrossomia Fetal/epidemiologia , Macrossomia Fetal/etiologia , Hemoglobinas Glicadas/análise , Humanos , Hiperglicemia/prevenção & controle , Hipoglicemia/prevenção & controle , Incidência , Recém-Nascido , Análise de Intenção de Tratamento , Perda de Seguimento , Masculino , Países Baixos/epidemiologia , Pacientes Desistentes do Tratamento , Gravidez , Gravidez em Diabéticas/fisiopatologia , Gravidez em Diabéticas/terapia , Risco
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA