Factors associated with stillbirth in women with diabetes.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Stillbirth risk is increased in pregnancy complicated by diabetes. Fear of stillbirth has major influence on obstetric management, particularly timing of delivery. We analysed population-level data from Scotland to describe timing of stillbirths in women with diabetes and associated risk factors. METHODS: A retrospective cohort of singleton deliveries to mothers with type 1 (n = 3778) and type 2 diabetes (n = 1614) from 1 April 1998 to 30 June 2016 was analysed using linked routine care datasets. Maternal and fetal characteristics, HbA1c data and delivery timing were compared between stillborn and liveborn groups. RESULTS: Stillbirth rates were 16.1 (95% CI 12.4, 20.8) and 22.9 (95% CI 16.4, 31.8) per 1000 births in women with type 1 (n = 61) and type 2 diabetes (n = 37), respectively. In women with type 1 diabetes, higher HbA1c before pregnancy (OR 1.03 [95% CI 1.01, 1.04]; p = 0.0003) and in later pregnancy (OR 1.06 [95% CI 1.04, 1.08]; p < 0.0001) were associated with stillbirth, while in women with type 2 diabetes, higher maternal BMI (OR 1.07 [95% CI 1.01, 1.14]; p = 0.02) and pre-pregnancy HbA1c (OR 1.02 [95% CI 1.00, 1.04]; p = 0.016) were associated with stillbirth. Risk was highest in infants with birthweights <10th centile (sixfold higher born to women with type 1 diabetes [n = 5 stillbirths, 67 livebirths]; threefold higher for women with type 2 diabetes [n = 4 stillbirths, 78 livebirths]) compared with those in the 10th-90th centile (n = 20 stillbirths, 1685 livebirths). Risk was twofold higher in infants with birthweights >95th centile born to women with type 2 diabetes (n = 15 stillbirths, 402 livebirths). A high proportion of stillborn infants were male among mothers with type 2 diabetes (81.1% vs 50.5% livebirths, p = 0.0002). A third of stillbirths occurred at term, with highest rates in the 38th week (7.0 [95% CI 3.7, 12.9] per 1000 ongoing pregnancies) among mothers with type 1 diabetes and in the 39th week (9.3 [95% CI 2.4, 29.2]) for type 2 diabetes. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Maternal blood glucose levels and BMI are important modifiable risk factors for stillbirth in diabetes. Babies at extremes of weight centiles are at most risk. Many stillbirths occur at term and could potentially be prevented by change in routine care and delivery policies.

Diabetes and pregnancy: national trends over a 15 year period.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: We aimed to examine time trends in national perinatal outcomes in pregnancies complicated by pre-existing type 1 or type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We analysed episode-level data on all obstetric inpatient delivery events (live or stillbirth) between 1 April 1998 and 31 March 2013 (n = 813,921) using the Scottish Morbidity Record (SMR02). Pregnancies to mothers with type 1 (n = 3229) and type 2 (n = 1452) diabetes were identified from the national diabetes database (Scottish Care Information-Diabetes), and perinatal outcomes were compared among women with type 1 diabetes, type 2 diabetes and those without diabetes. RESULTS: The number of pregnancies complicated by diabetes increased significantly, by 44% in type 1 diabetes and 90% in type 2 diabetes, across the 15 years examined, to rates of 1 in 210 and 1 in 504 deliveries, respectively. Compared with women without diabetes, delivery occurred 2.6 weeks earlier (type 1 diabetes 36.7 ± 2.3 weeks) and 2 weeks earlier (type 2 diabetes 37.3 ± 2.4 weeks), respectively, showing significant reductions for both type 1 (from 36.7 weeks to 36.4 weeks, p = 0.03) and type 2 (from 38.0 weeks to 37.2 weeks, p < 0.001) diabetes across the time period. The proportions of preterm delivery were markedly increased in women with diabetes (35.3% type 1 diabetes, 21.8% type 2 diabetes, 6.1% without diabetes; p < 0.0001), and these proportions increased with time for both groups (p < 0.005). Proportions of elective Caesarean sections (29.4% type 1 diabetes, 30.5% type 2 diabetes, 9.6% without diabetes) and emergency Caesarean sections (38.3% type 1 diabetes, 29.1% type 2 diabetes, 14.6% without diabetes) were greatly increased in women with diabetes and increased over time except for stable rates of emergency Caesarean section in type 1 diabetes. Gestational age-, sex- and parity-adjusted z score for birthweight (1.33 ± 1.34; p < 0.001) were higher in type 1 diabetes and increased over time from 1.22 to 1.47 (p < 0.001). Birthweight was also increased in type 2 diabetes (0.94 ± 1.34; p < 0.001) but did not alter with time. There were 65 perinatal deaths in offspring of mothers with type 1 diabetes and 39 to mothers with type 2 diabetes, representing perinatal mortality rates of 20.1 (95% CI 14.7, 24.3) and 26.9 (16.7, 32.9) per 1000 births, respectively, and rates 3.1 and 4.2 times, respectively, those observed in the non-diabetic population (p < 0.001). Stillbirth rates in type 1 and type 2 diabetes were 4.0-fold and 5.1-fold that in the non-diabetic population (p < 0.001). Perinatal mortality and stillbirth rates showed no significant fall over time despite small falls in the rates for the non-diabetic population. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Women with diabetes are receiving increased intervention in pregnancy (earlier delivery, increased Caesarean section rates), but despite this, higher birthweights are being recorded. Improvements in rates of stillbirth seen in the general population are not being reflected in changes in stillbirth or perinatal mortality in our population with diabetes.

Gestational diabetes mellitus-right person, right treatment, right time?

BACKGROUND: Personalised treatment that is uniquely tailored to an individual's phenotype has become a key goal of clinical and pharmaceutical development across many, particularly chronic, diseases. For type 2 diabetes, the importance of the underlying clinical heterogeneity of the condition is emphasised and a range of treatments are now available, with personalised approaches being developed. While a close connection between risk factors for type 2 diabetes and gestational diabetes has long been acknowledged, stratification of screening, treatment and obstetric intervention remains in its infancy. CONCLUSIONS: Although there have been major advances in our understanding of glucose tolerance in pregnancy and of the benefits of treatment of gestational diabetes, we argue that far more vigorous approaches are needed to enable development of companion diagnostics, and to ensure the efficacious and safe use of novel therapeutic agents and strategies to improve outcomes in this common condition.

Validation of semi-automated flow-mediated dilation measurement in healthy volunteers.

BACKGROUND: Flow-mediated dilation (FMD) is a non-invasive imaging modality used to measure endothelial function but has significant intra- and inter-observer variability. The use of semi-automated FMD devices could overcome this limitation. We assessed the reproducibility of same-day semi-automated FMD measurements by investigators who received basic training on the correct use of the device. METHODS: Forty-three healthy volunteers had two brachial artery FMD measurements performed 20 minutes apart using the UNEX EF 38G device, and automated outputs were produced. Images were also manually analysed using edge-detection software. The reproducibility of repeat FMD measurements within individuals was compared for automated and manual readings, and the correlation between analytical techniques was calculated. RESULTS: Twenty-five percent of scans were of non-diagnostic quality (n = 32). Automated analyses demonstrated sub-optimal reproducibility and measurement variability [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICCC) = 0.334, coefficient of variation (CV) = 45.87%]. In contrast, manually analysed scans had excellent reproducibility and low measurement variance (ICCC = 0.815, CV = 11.40%). FMD values obtained from automated and manual analysis correlated poorly (r = 0.164), whereas resting (r = 0.955) and maximal brachial artery diameters demonstrated excellent correlation (r = 0.867). CONCLUSION: Manually evaluated serial UNEX EF readings have good reproducibility and therefore, the optimal FMD workflow involves manual analyses prior to independent automated interrogation. The high non-diagnostic scan rate is most likely the result of insufficient training and indicates that semi-automatic devices such as UNEX EF should be used by experienced investigators to achieve optimal results.

Systematic review of microRNA biomarkers in acute coronary syndrome and stable coronary artery disease.

The aim of this systematic review was to assess dysregulated miRNA biomarkers in coronary artery disease (CAD). Dysregulated microRNA (miRNAs) have been shown to be linked to cardiovascular pathologies including CAD and may have utility as diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers. We compared miRNAs identified in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) compared with stable CAD and control populations. We conducted a systematic search of controlled vocabulary and free text terms related to ACS, stable CAD and miRNA in Biosis Previews (OvidSP), The Cochrane Library (Wiley), Embase (OvidSP), Global Health (OvidSP), Medline (PubMed and OvidSP), Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics), and ClinicalTrials.gov which yielded 7370 articles. Of these, 140 original articles were appropriate for data extraction. The most frequently reported miRNAs in any CAD (miR-1, miR-133a, miR-208a/b, and miR-499) are expressed abundantly in the heart and play crucial roles in cardiac physiology. In studies comparing ACS cases with stable CAD patients, miR-21, miR-208a/b, miR-133a/b, miR-30 family, miR-19, and miR-20 were most frequently reported to be dysregulated in ACS. While a number of miRNAs feature consistently across studies in their expression in both ACS and stable CAD, when compared with controls, certain miRNAs were reported as biomarkers specifically in ACS (miR-499, miR-1, miR-133a/b, and miR-208a/b) and stable CAD (miR-215, miR-487a, and miR-502). Thus, miR-21, miR-133, and miR-499 appear to have the most potential as biomarkers to differentiate the diagnosis of ACS from stable CAD, especially miR-499 which showed a correlation between the level of their concentration gradient and myocardial damage. Although these miRNAs are potential diagnostic biomarkers, these findings should be interpreted with caution as the majority of studies conducted predefined candidate-driven assessments of a limited number of miRNAs (PROSPERO registration: CRD42017079744).