Antenatal risk score for prediction of shoulder dystocia with focus on fetal ultrasound data.

BACKGROUND: Shoulder dystocia is one of the most threatening complications during delivery, and although it is difficult to predict, individual risk should be considered when counseling for mode of delivery. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop and validate a risk score for shoulder dystocia based on fetal ultrasound and maternal data from 15,000 deliveries. STUDY DESIGN: Data were retrospectively obtained of deliveries in 3 tertiary centers between 2014 and 2017 for the derivation cohort and between 2018 and 2020 for the validation cohort. Inclusion criteria were singleton pregnancy, vaginal delivery in cephalic presentation at ≥37+0 weeks' gestation, and fetal biometry data available within 2 weeks of delivery. Independent predictors were determined by multivariate regression analysis in the derivation cohort, and a score was developed on the basis of the effect of the predictors. RESULTS: The derivation cohort consisted of 7396 deliveries with a 0.91% rate of shoulder dystocia, and the validation cohort of 7965 deliveries with a 1.0% rate of shoulder dystocia. Among all women, 13.8% had diabetes mellitus, and 12.1% were obese (body mass index ≥30 kg/m2). Independent risk factors in the derivation cohort were: estimated fetal weight ≥4250 g (odds ratio, 4.27; P=.002), abdominal-head-circumference ≥2.5 cm (odds ratio, 3.96; P<.001), and diabetes mellitus (odds ratio, 2.18; P=.009). On the basis of the strength of effect, a risk score was developed: estimated fetal weight ≥4250 g=2, abdominal-head-circumference ≥2.5 cm=2, and diabetes mellitus=1. The risk score predicted shoulder dystocia with moderate discriminatory ability (area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve, 0.69; P<.001; area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve, 0.71; P<.001) and good calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit; P=.466; P=.167) for the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively. With 1 score point, 16 shoulder dystocia cases occurred in 1764 deliveries, with 0.6% shoulder dystocia incidence and a number needed to treat with cesarean delivery to avoid 1 case of shoulder dystocia of 172 (2 points: 38/1809, 2.1%, 48; 3 points: 18/336, 5.4%, 19; 4 points: 10/96, 10.5%, 10; and 5 points: 5/20, 25%, 4); 40.8% of the shoulder dystocia cases occurred without risk factors. CONCLUSION: The presented risk score for shoulder dystocia may act as a supplemental tool for the clinical decision-making regarding mode of delivery. According to our score model, in pregnancies with a score ≤2, meaning having solely estimated fetal weight ≥4250 g, or abdominal-head-circumference ≥2.5, or diabetes mellitus, cesarean delivery for prevention of shoulder dystocia should not be recommended because of the high number needed to treat to avoid 1 case of shoulder dystocia. Conversely, in patients with a score of ≥4 with or without diabetes mellitus, cesarean delivery may be considered. However, in 40% of the shoulder dystocia cases, no risk factors had been present.

Antenatal risk prediction of shoulder dystocia: influence of diabetes and obesity: a multicenter study.

PURPOSE: To estimate the risk of shoulder dystocia (SD) in pregnancies with/without maternal diabetes or obesity; to identify antenatal maternal and fetal ultrasound-derived risk factors and calculate their contributions. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective analysis of 13,428 deliveries in three tertiary hospitals (2014-2017) with fetal ultrasound data ≤ 14 days prior to delivery (n = 7396). INCLUSION CRITERIA: singleton pregnancies in women ≥ 18 years old; vertex presentation; vaginal delivery at ≥ 37 weeks of gestation. Estimated fetal weight (EFW) and birth weight (BW) were categorized by steps of 250 g. To evaluate risk factors, a model was performed using ultrasound data with SD as the dependent variable. RESULTS: Diabetes was present in 9.3%; BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 in 10.4% and excessive weight gain in 39.8%. The total SD rate was 0.9%, with diabetes 2.0% and with obesity 1.9%. These increased with BW 4250-4499 g compared to 4000-4249 g in women with diabetes (12.1% vs 1.9%, P = 0.010) and without (6.1% vs 1.6%, P < 0.001) and at the same BW threshold for women with obesity (9.6% vs 0.6%, P = 0.002) or without (6.4% vs 1.8%, P < 0.001). Rates increased similarly for EFW at 4250 g and for AC-HC at 2.5 cm. Independent risk factors for SD were EFW ≥ 4250 g (OR 3.8, 95% CI 1.5-9.4), AC-HC ≥ 2.5 cm (OR 3.1, 95% CI 1.3-7.5) and diabetes (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.2-4.0). HC/AC ratio, obesity, excessive weight gain and labor induction were not significant. CONCLUSION: Independent of diabetes, which remains a risk factor for SD, a significant increase may be expected if the EFW is ≥ 4250 g and AC-HC is ≥ 2.5 cm.

A core outcome set for studies of gestational diabetes mellitus prevention and treatment.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this systematic review was to develop core outcome sets (COSs) for trials evaluating interventions for the prevention or treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). METHODS: We identified previously reported outcomes through a systematic review of the literature. These outcomes were presented to key stakeholders (including patient representatives, researchers and clinicians) for prioritisation using a three-round, e-Delphi study. A priori consensus criteria informed which outcomes were brought forward for discussion at a face-to-face consensus meeting where the COS was finalised. RESULTS: Our review identified 74 GDM prevention and 116 GDM treatment outcomes, which were presented to stakeholders in round 1 of the e-Delphi study. Round 1 was completed by 173 stakeholders, 70% (121/173) of whom went on to complete round 2; 84% (102/121) of round 2 responders completed round 3. Twenty-two GDM prevention outcomes and 30 GDM treatment outcomes were discussed at the consensus meeting. Owing to significant overlap between included prevention and treatment outcomes, consensus meeting stakeholders agreed to develop a single prevention/treatment COS. Fourteen outcomes were included in the final COS. These consisted of six maternal outcomes (GDM diagnosis, adherence to the intervention, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, requirement and type of pharmacological therapy for hyperglycaemia, gestational weight gain and mode of birth) and eight neonatal outcomes (birthweight, large for gestational age, small for gestational age, gestational age at birth, preterm birth, neonatal hypoglycaemia, neonatal death and stillbirth). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: This COS will enable future GDM prevention and treatment trials to measure similar outcomes that matter to stakeholders and facilitate comparison and combination of these studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered prospectively with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) database: http://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/686/.

Follow-up at 1 year and beyond of women with gestational diabetes treated with insulin and/or oral glucose-lowering agents: a core outcome set using a Delphi survey.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is linked with a higher lifetime risk for the development of impaired fasting glucose, impaired glucose tolerance, type 2 diabetes, the metabolic syndrome, cardiovascular disease, postpartum depression and tumours. Despite this, there is no consistency in the long-term follow-up of women with a previous diagnosis of GDM. Further, the outcomes selected and reported in the research involving this population are heterogeneous and lack standardisation. This amplifies the risk of reporting bias and diminishes the likelihood of significant comparisons between studies. The aim of this study is to develop a core outcome set (COS) for RCTs and other studies evaluating the long-term follow-up at 1 year and beyond of women with previous GDM treated with insulin and/oral glucose-lowering agents. METHODS: The study consisted of three work packages: (1) a systematic review of the outcomes reported in previous RCTs of the follow-up at 1 year and beyond of women with GDM treated with insulin and/or oral glucose-lowering agents; (2) a three-round online Delphi survey with key stakeholders to prioritise these outcomes; and (3) a consensus meeting where the final COS was decided. RESULTS: Of 3344 abstracts identified and evaluated, 62 papers were retrieved and 25/62 papers were included in this review. A total of 121 outcomes were identified and included in the Delphi survey. Delphi round 1 was emailed to 835 participants and 288 (34.5%) responded. In round 2, 190 of 288 (65.9%) participants responded and in round 3, 165 of 190 (86.8%) participants responded. In total, nine outcomes were selected and agreed for inclusion in the final COS: assessment of glycaemic status; diagnosis of type 2 diabetes since the index pregnancy; number of pregnancies since the index pregnancy; number of pregnancies with a diagnosis of GDM since the index pregnancy; diagnosis of prediabetes since the index pregnancy; BMI; post-pregnancy weight retention; resting blood pressure; and breastfeeding. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: This study identified a COS that will help bring consistency and uniformity to outcome selection and reporting in clinical trials and other studies involving the follow-up at 1 year and beyond of women diagnosed with GDM treated with insulin and/or oral glucose-lowering agents during pregnancy.

Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity.

Importance: The sequelae of gestational diabetes (GD) by contemporary criteria that diagnose approximately twice as many women as previously used criteria are unclear. Objective: To examine associations of GD with maternal glucose metabolism and childhood adiposity 10 to 14 years' postpartum. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome (HAPO) Study established associations of glucose levels during pregnancy with perinatal outcomes and the follow-up study evaluated the long-term outcomes (4697 mothers and 4832 children; study visits occurred between February 13, 2013, and December 13, 2016). Exposures: Gestational diabetes was defined post hoc using criteria from the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups consisting of 1 or more of the following 75-g oral glucose tolerance test results (fasting plasma glucose ≥92 mg/dL; 1-hour plasma glucose level ≥180 mg/dL; 2-hour plasma glucose level ≥153 mg/dL). Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary maternal outcome: a disorder of glucose metabolism (composite of type 2 diabetes or prediabetes). Primary outcome for children: being overweight or obese; secondary outcomes: obesity, body fat percentage, waist circumference, and sum of skinfolds (>85th percentile for latter 3 outcomes). Results: The analytic cohort included 4697 mothers (mean [SD] age, 41.7 [5.7] years) and 4832 children (mean [SD] age, 11.4 [1.2] years; 51.0% male). The median duration of follow-up was 11.4 years. The criteria for GD were met by 14.3% (672/4697) of mothers overall and by 14.1% (683/4832) of mothers of participating children. Among mothers with GD, 52.2% (346/663) developed a disorder of glucose metabolism vs 20.1% (791/3946) of mothers without GD (odds ratio [OR], 3.44 [95% CI, 2.85 to 4.14]; risk difference [RD], 25.7% [95% CI, 21.7% to 29.7%]). Among children of mothers with GD, 39.5% (269/681) were overweight or obese and 19.1% (130/681) were obese vs 28.6% (1172/4094) and 9.9% (405/4094), respectively, for children of mothers without GD. Adjusted for maternal body mass index during pregnancy, the OR was 1.21 (95% CI, 1.00 to 1.46) for children who were overweight or obese and the RD was 3.7% (95% CI, -0.16% to 7.5%); the OR was 1.58 (95% CI, 1.24 to 2.01) for children who were obese and the RD was 5.0% (95% CI, 2.0% to 8.0%); the OR was 1.35 (95% CI, 1.08 to 1.68) for body fat percentage and the RD was 4.2% (95% CI, 0.9% to 7.4%); the OR was 1.34 (95% CI, 1.08 to 1.67) for waist circumference and the RD was 4.1% (95% CI, 0.8% to 7.3%); and the OR was 1.57 (95% CI, 1.27 to 1.95) for sum of skinfolds and the RD was 6.5% (95% CI, 3.1% to 9.9%). Conclusions and Relevance: Among women with GD identified by contemporary criteria compared with those without it, GD was significantly associated with a higher maternal risk for a disorder of glucose metabolism during long-term follow-up after pregnancy. Among children of mothers with GD vs those without it, the difference in childhood overweight or obesity defined by body mass index cutoffs was not statistically significant; however, additional measures of childhood adiposity may be relevant in interpreting the study findings.

Improved pregnancy outcomes in women with type 1 and type 2 diabetes but substantial clinic-to-clinic variations: a prospective nationwide study.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this prospective nationwide study was to examine antenatal pregnancy care and pregnancy outcomes in women with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, and to describe changes since 2002/2003. METHODS: This national population-based cohort included 3036 pregnant women with diabetes from 155 maternity clinics in England and Wales who delivered during 2015. The main outcome measures were maternal glycaemic control, preterm delivery (before 37 weeks), infant large for gestational age (LGA), and rates of congenital anomaly, stillbirth and neonatal death. RESULTS: Of 3036 women, 1563 (51%) had type 1, 1386 (46%) had type 2 and 87 (3%) had other types of diabetes. The percentage of women achieving HbA1c < 6.5% (48 mmol/mol) in early pregnancy varied greatly between clinics (median [interquartile range] 14.3% [7.7-22.2] for type 1, 37.0% [27.3-46.2] for type 2). The number of infants born preterm (21.7% vs 39.7%) and LGA (23.9% vs 46.4%) were lower for women with type 2 compared with type 1 diabetes (both p < 0.001). The prevalence rates for congenital anomaly (46.2/1000 births for type 1, 34.6/1000 births for type 2) and neonatal death (8.1/1000 births for type 1, 11.4/1000 births for type 2) were unchanged since 2002/2003. Stillbirth rates are almost 2.5 times lower than in 2002/2003 (10.7 vs 25.8/1000 births for type 1, p = 0.0012; 10.5 vs 29.2/1000 births for type 2, p = 0.0091). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Stillbirth rates among women with type 1 and type 2 diabetes have decreased since 2002/2003. Rates of preterm delivery and LGA infants are lower in women with type 2 compared with type 1 diabetes. In women with type 1 diabetes, suboptimal glucose control and high rates of perinatal morbidity persist with substantial variations between clinics. DATA AVAILABILITY: Further details of the data collection methodology, individual clinic data and the full audit reports for healthcare professionals and service users are available from http://content.digital.nhs.uk/npid .

A core outcome set for studies evaluating the effectiveness of prepregnancy care for women with pregestational diabetes.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this study was to develop a core outcome set (COS) for trials and other studies evaluating the effectiveness of prepregnancy care for women with pregestational (pre-existing) diabetes mellitus. METHODS: A systematic literature review was completed to identify all outcomes reported in prior studies in this area. Key stakeholders then prioritised these outcomes using a Delphi study. The list of outcomes included in the final COS were finalised at a face-to-face consensus meeting. RESULTS: In total, 17 outcomes were selected and agreed on for inclusion in the final COS. These outcomes were grouped under three domains: measures of pregnancy preparation (n = 9), neonatal outcomes (n = 6) and maternal outcomes (n = 2). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: This study identified a COS essential for studies evaluating prepregnancy care for women with pregestational diabetes. It is advocated that all trials and other non-randomised studies and audits in this area use this COS with the aim of improving transparency and the ability to compare and combine future studies with greater ease.

Associations of glycemia and lipid levels in pregnancy with dyslipidemia 10-14 years later: The HAPO follow-up study.

AIMS: To examine associations of pregnancy glycemia with future dyslipidemia. METHODS: We analyzed data from Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome Follow-Up Study participants. We examined associations of gestational diabetes (GDM), sum of fasting, 1-hour, and 2-hour glucose z-scores after 75-g load, insulin sensitivity, and lipid levels at 24-32 weeks' gestation with dyslipidemia 10-14 years postpartum. RESULTS: Among 4,693 women, 14.3% had GDM. At follow-up, mean (SD) age was 41.7 (5.7) years, 32.3% had total cholesterol (TC) ≥ 5.17, 27.2% had HDL cholesterol < 1.29, 22.4% had LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) ≥ 3.36, 10.9% had triglycerides ≥ 1.69 mmol/L, and 2.9% had type 2 diabetes. After covariate adjustment, pregnancy glycemic measures were associated with all follow-up dyslipidemias. After additional adjustment for pregnancy lipids, GDM remained associated with TC ≥ 5.17 mmol/L (odds ratio [95% CI], 1.63 [1.22-2.18]) and LDL-C ≥ 3.36 mmol/L (1.63 [1.20-2.22]), even in the absence of type 2 diabetes development (1.55 [1.15-2.10] and 1.56 [1.13-2.16], respectively). Continuous glycemic measures in pregnancy were significantly associated with all follow-up dyslipidemias, independent of pregnancy lipids and type 2 diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnancy glycemia was associated with dyslipidemia 10-14 years later, independent of pregnancy lipid levels and in the absence of type 2 diabetes development. Lipid screening after GDM deserves special consideration.

Vitamins C and E for prevention of pre-eclampsia in women with type 1 diabetes (DAPIT): a randomised placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Results of several trials of antioxidant use during pregnancy have not shown a reduction in pre-eclampsia, but the effect in women with diabetes is unknown. We aimed to assess whether supplementation with vitamins C and E reduced incidence of pre-eclampsia in women with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: We enrolled women from 25 UK antenatal metabolic clinics in a multicentre randomised placebo-controlled trial. Eligibility criteria were type 1 diabetes preceding pregnancy, presentation between 8 weeks' and 22 weeks' gestation, singleton pregnancy, and age 16 years or older. Women were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive 1000 mg vitamin C and 400 IU vitamin E (alpha-tocopherol) or matched placebo daily until delivery. The randomisation sequence was stratified by centre with balanced blocks of eight patients. All trial personnel and participants were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was pre-eclampsia, which we defined as gestational hypertension with proteinuria. Analysis was by modified intention to treat. This study is registered, ISRCTN27214045. FINDINGS: Between April, 2003, and June, 2008, 762 women were randomly allocated to treatment groups (379 vitamin supplementation, 383 placebo). The primary endpoint was assessed for 375 women allocated to receive vitamins, and 374 allocated to placebo. Rates of pre-eclampsia did not differ between vitamin (15%, n=57) and placebo (19%, 70) groups (risk ratio 0.81, 95% CI 0.59-1.12). No adverse maternal or neonatal outcomes were reported. INTERPRETATION: Supplementation with vitamins C and E did not reduce risk of pre-eclampsia in women with type 1 diabetes. However, the possibility that vitamin supplementation might be beneficial in women with a low antioxidant status at baseline needs further testing. FUNDING: The Wellcome Trust.

Resolving the Gestational Diabetes Diagnosis Conundrum: The Need for a Randomized Controlled Trial of Treatment.

The diagnosis of and criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) continue to divide the scientific and medical community, both between and within countries. Many argue for universal adoption of the International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria and feel that further clinical trials are unjustified and even unethical. However, there are concerns about the large increase in number of women who would be diagnosed with GDM using these criteria and the subsequent impact on health care resources and the individual. This Perspective reviews the origins of the IADPSG consensus and points out some of its less well-known limitations, particularly with respect to identifying women at risk for an adverse pregnancy outcome. It also questions the clinical and cost-effectiveness data often cited to support the IADPSG glycemic thresholds. We present the argument that adoption of diagnostic criteria defining GDM should be based on response to treatment at different diagnostic thresholds of maternal glycemia. This will likely require an international multicenter trial of treatment.

Protein-creatinine ratio and albumin-creatinine ratio for the diagnosis of significant proteinuria in pregnant women with hypertension: Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy.

BACKGROUND: The gold standard for assessment and diagnosis of significant proteinuria in pregnancy has been by 24-hour urine collection and analysis. Determining fast, accurate methods to identify clinically significant proteinuria would aid diagnosis of pre-eclampsia. The objective of this study was to determine the accuracy of spot protein-creatinine ratio (PCR) and albumin-creatinine ratio (ACR) measurements compared with 24-hour urine collection for the identification of clinically significant proteinuria in women with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. METHODS: Search strategies were developed for electronic databases from inception to 1st October 2020. Data were assessed for methodological quality using the QUADAS-II checklist for risk of bias and quality of the evidence using GRADE. Meta-analysis was performed where there were at least four studies presenting data for the same comparison (test and threshold). This is an update of the review for NICE guideline NG133 (published June 2019) and includes additional data. RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies were included. PCR measurements (28 studies) showed high sensitivity (91%) and specificity (89%) at a threshold of 30 mg/mmol (n = 3577). Higher thresholds (>60 mg/mmol) increased specificity, but reduced sensitivity. At a threshold of PCR 30 mg/mmol, diagnostic accuracy improved for sensitivity and specificity (93% for both) in studies where the first morning void was excluded (n = 1868). Data available (4 studies) for ACR supports ruling out of significant proteinuria at less than 2 mg/mmol, though evidence was limited by paucity of data and wide confidence intervals around the result. CONCLUSIONS: PCR and ACR have high accuracy compared to the gold standard 24-hour urine collection.

A cost-effectiveness comparison of the NICE 2015 and WHO 2013 diagnostic criteria for women with gestational diabetes with and without risk factors.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the cost-effectiveness (CE) of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) 2015 and the WHO 2013 diagnostic thresholds for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). SETTING: The analysis was from the perspective of the National Health Service in England and Wales. PARTICIPANTS: 6221 patients from four of the Hyperglycaemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes (HAPO) study centres (two UK, two Australian), 6308 patients from the Atlantic Diabetes in Pregnancy study and 12 755 patients from UK clinical practice. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES PLANNED: The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), net monetary benefit (NMB) and the probability of being cost-effective at CE thresholds of £20 000 and £30 000 per QALY. RESULTS: In a population of pregnant women from the four HAPO study centres and using NICE-defined risk factors for GDM, diagnosing GDM using NICE 2015 criteria had an NMB of £239 902 (relative to no treatment) at a CE threshold of £30 000 per QALY compared with WHO 2013 criteria, which had an NMB of £186 675. NICE 2015 criteria had a 51.5% probability of being cost-effective compared with the WHO 2013 diagnostic criteria, which had a 27.6% probability of being cost-effective (no treatment had a 21.0% probability of being cost-effective). For women without NICE risk factors in this population, the NMBs for NICE 2015 and WHO 2013 criteria were both negative relative to no treatment and no treatment had a 78.1% probability of being cost-effective. CONCLUSION: The NICE 2015 diagnostic criteria for GDM can be considered cost-effective relative to the WHO 2013 alternative at a CE threshold of £30 000 per QALY. Universal screening for GDM was not found to be cost-effective relative to screening based on NICE risk factors.

Impact of an educational DVD on anxiety and glycaemic control in women diagnosed with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM): A randomised controlled trial.

AIMS: The diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) during pregnancy can lead to anxiety. This study evaluated the impact of an innovative patient-centred educational DVD on anxiety and glycaemic control in women newly diagnosed with GDM. METHODS: 150 multi-ethnic women, aged 19-44years, from three UK hospitals were randomised to either usual care plus DVD (DVD group, n=77) or usual care alone (control group, n=73) at GDM diagnosis. Primary outcomes were anxiety (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory) and mean 1-h postprandial capillary self-monitored blood glucose for all meals, on day prior to follow-up. RESULTS: No significant difference between the DVD and control group were reported, for anxiety (37.7±11.7 vs 36.2±10.9; mean difference after adjustment for covariates (95% CI) 2.5 (-0.8, 5.9) or for mean 1-h postprandial glucose for all meals (6.9±0.9 vs 7.0±1.2mmol/L; -0.2 (-0.5, 0.2). However, the DVD group had significantly lower postprandial breakfast glucose compared to the control group (6.8±1.2 vs 7.4±1.9mmol/L; -0.5 (-1.1, -<0.1; p=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The results in this trial did not highlight any differences between those who received the intervention and those who received usual care. It is possible that women already felt supported by their frequent attendance at specialist clinics for monitoring and advice. Healthcare professional and family support are key elements to empowering women with GDM and require further consideration in future interventions. Nonetheless, educational resources such as this will be beneficial to help support women given the current resource and time implications of the year on year rises in the incidence of gestational diabetes.

Serum Fatty Acid Binding Protein 4 (FABP4) Predicts Pre-eclampsia in Women With Type 1 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between fatty acid binding protein 4 (FABP4) and pre-eclampsia risk in women with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Serum FABP4 was measured in 710 women from the Diabetes and Pre-eclampsia Intervention Trial (DAPIT) in early pregnancy and in the second trimester (median 14 and 26 weeks' gestation, respectively). RESULTS: FABP4 was significantly elevated in early pregnancy (geometric mean 15.8 ng/mL [interquartile range 11.6-21.4] vs. 12.7 ng/mL [interquartile range 9.6-17]; P < 0.001) and the second trimester (18.8 ng/mL [interquartile range 13.6-25.8] vs. 14.6 ng/mL [interquartile range 10.8-19.7]; P < 0.001) in women in whom pre-eclampsia later developed. Elevated second-trimester FABP4 level was independently associated with pre-eclampsia (odds ratio 2.87 [95% CI 1.24-6.68], P = 0.03). The addition of FABP4 to established risk factors significantly improved net reclassification improvement at both time points and integrated discrimination improvement in the second trimester. CONCLUSIONS: Increased second-trimester FABP4 independently predicted pre-eclampsia and significantly improved reclassification and discrimination. FABP4 shows potential as a novel biomarker for pre-eclampsia prediction in women with type 1 diabetes.

Glycemic targets in the second and third trimester of pregnancy for women with type 1 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the relationship between second and third trimester glycemic control and adverse outcomes in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes, as uncertainty exists about optimum glycemic targets. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Pregnancy outcomes were assessed prospectively in 725 women with type 1 diabetes from the Diabetes and Pre-eclampsia Intervention Trial. HbA1c (A1C) values at 26 and 34 weeks' gestation were categorized into five groups, the lowest, <6.0% (42 mmol/mol), being the reference. Average pre- and postprandial results from an eight-point capillary glucose profile the previous day were categorized into five groups, the lowest (preprandial <5.0 mmol/L and postprandial <6.0 mmol/L) being the reference. RESULTS: An A1C of 6.0-6.4% (42-47 mmol/mol) at 26 weeks' gestation was associated with a significantly increased risk of large for gestational age (LGA) (odds ratio 1.7 [95% CI 1.0-3.0]) and an A1C of 6.5-6.9% (48-52 mmol/mol) with a significantly increased risk of preterm delivery (odds ratio 2.5 [95% CI 1.3-4.8]), pre-eclampsia (4.3 [1.7-10.8]), need for a neonatal glucose infusion (2.9 [1.5-5.6]), and a composite adverse outcome (3.2 [1.3-8.0]). These risks increased progressively with increasing A1C. Results were similar at 34 weeks' gestation. Glucose data showed less consistent trends, although the risk of a composite adverse outcome increased with preprandial glucose levels between 6.0 and 6.9 mmol/L at 34 weeks (3.3 [1.3-8.0]). CONCLUSIONS: LGA increased significantly with an A1C ≥6.0 (42 mmol/mol) at 26 and 34 weeks' gestation and with other adverse outcomes with an A1C ≥6.5% (48 mmol/mol). The data suggest that there is clinical utility in regular measurement of A1C during pregnancy.

Antenatal visits and adverse perinatal outcomes: results from a British population-based study.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to explore the relationship between the number of antenatal visits made by a representative sample of British women and adverse perinatal outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 20,771 women with a singleton pregnancy were recruited from nine representative maternity units in Northern England and North Wales. A record of each woman's antenatal care and the adverse perinatal outcomes of interest were extracted retrospectively from their case notes. Multivariate binomial regression was used to model the probability of adverse outcomes with respect to the absolute number of antenatal visits, after controlling for potentially confounding factors. Separate analyses were performed for primiparae and multiparae, and for low- and high-risk women within each parous group. RESULTS: The study revealed an inverse association between the number of antenatal visits and delivery of a low birthweight infant, infant admission to a special care baby unit and perinatal mortality over the 4-14 antenatal visit range, which dissipated at higher levels of antenatal visits. The study also revealed a significant positive association between the number of antenatal visits and delivery by caesarean section (P<0.01). Similar trends in the probabilities of adverse outcomes were observed for low- and high-risk women within each parous group. CONCLUSION: Further experimental research is required to ascertain whether a causal relationship exists between antenatal visiting schedules and adverse perinatal outcomes.

The role of angiogenic and antiangiogenic factors in the second trimester in the prediction of preeclampsia in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between circulating angiogenic and antiangiogenic factors in the second trimester and risk of preeclampsia in women with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Maternal plasma concentrations of placental growth factor (PlGF), soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase 1 (sFlt-1), and soluble endoglin (sEng) were available at 26 weeks of gestation in 540 women with type 1 diabetes enrolled in the Diabetes and Preeclampsia Intervention Trial. RESULTS: Preeclampsia developed in 17% of pregnancies (n = 94). At 26 weeks of gestation, women in whom preeclampsia developed later had significantly lower PlGF (median [interquartile range]: 231 pg/mL [120-423] vs. 365 pg/mL [237-582]; P < 0.001), higher sFlt-1 (1,522 pg/mL [1,108-3,393] vs. 1,193 pg/mL [844-1,630] P < 0.001), and higher sEng (6.2 ng/mL [4.9-7.9] vs. 5.1 ng/mL[(4.3-6.2]; P < 0.001) compared with women who did not have preeclampsia. In addition, the ratio of PlGF to sEng was significantly lower (40 [17-71] vs. 71 [44-114]; P < 0.001) and the ratio of sFlt-1 to PlGF was significantly higher (6.3 [3.4-15.7] vs. 3.1 [1.8-5.8]; P < 0.001) in women who later developed preeclampsia. The addition of the ratio of PlGF to sEng or the ratio of sFlt-1 to PlGF to a logistic model containing established risk factors (area under the curve [AUC], 0.813) significantly improved the predictive value (AUC, 0.850 and 0.846, respectively; P < 0.01) and significantly improved reclassification according to the integrated discrimination improvement index (IDI) (IDI scores 0.086 and 0.065, respectively; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that angiogenic and antiangiogenic factors measured during the second trimester are predictive of preeclampsia in women with type 1 diabetes. The addition of the ratio of PlGF to sEng or the ratio of sFlt-1 to PlGF to established clinical risk factors significantly improves the prediction of preeclampsia in women with type 1 diabetes.

Frequency of gestational diabetes mellitus at collaborating centers based on IADPSG consensus panel-recommended criteria: the Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome (HAPO) Study.

OBJECTIVE: To report frequencies of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) among the 15 centers that participated in the Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome (HAPO) Study using the new International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: All participants underwent a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test between 24 and 32 weeks' gestation. GDM was retrospectively classified using the IADPSG criteria (one or more fasting, 1-h, or 2-h plasma glucose concentrations equal to or greater than threshold values of 5.1, 10.0, or 8.5 mmol/L, respectively). RESULTS: Overall frequency of GDM was 17.8% (range 9.3-25.5%). There was substantial center-to-center variation in which glucose measures met diagnostic thresholds. CONCLUSIONS: Although the new diagnostic criteria for GDM apply globally, center-to-center differences occur in GDM frequency and relative diagnostic importance of fasting, 1-h, and 2-h glucose levels. This may impact strategies used for the diagnosis of GDM.

Optimal glycemic control, pre-eclampsia, and gestational hypertension in women with type 1 diabetes in the diabetes and pre-eclampsia intervention trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the relationship between glycemic control, pre-eclampsia, and gestational hypertension in women with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Pregnancy outcome (pre-eclampsia or gestational hypertension) was assessed prospectively in 749 women from the randomized controlled Diabetes and Pre-eclampsia Intervention Trial (DAPIT). HbA(1c) (A1C) values were available up to 6 months before pregnancy (n = 542), at the first antenatal visit (median 9 weeks) (n = 721), at 26 weeks' gestation (n = 592), and at 34 weeks' gestation (n = 519) and were categorized as optimal (<6.1%: referent), good (6.1-6.9%), moderate (7.0-7.9%), and poor (≥8.0%) glycemic control, respectively. RESULTS: Pre-eclampsia and gestational hypertension developed in 17 and 11% of pregnancies, respectively. Women who developed pre-eclampsia had significantly higher A1C values before and during pregnancy compared with women who did not develop pre-eclampsia (P < 0.05, respectively). In early pregnancy, A1C ≥ 8.0% was associated with a significantly increased risk of pre-eclampsia (odds ratio 3.68 [95% CI 1.17-11.6]) compared with optimal control. At 26 weeks' gestation, A1C values ≥ 6.1% (good: 2.09 [1.03-4.21]; moderate: 3.20 [1.47-7.00]; and poor: 3.81 [1.30-11.1]) and at 34 weeks' gestation A1C values ≥ 7.0% (moderate: 3.27 [1.31-8.20] and poor: 8.01 [2.04-31.5]) significantly increased the risk of pre-eclampsia compared with optimal control. The adjusted odds ratios for pre-eclampsia for each 1% decrement in A1C before pregnancy, at the first antenatal visit, at 26 weeks' gestation, and at 34 weeks' gestation were 0.88 (0.75-1.03), 0.75 (0.64-0.88), 0.57 (0.42-0.78), and 0.47 (0.31-0.70), respectively. Glycemic control was not significantly associated with gestational hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: Women who developed pre-eclampsia had significantly higher A1C values before and during pregnancy. These data suggest that optimal glycemic control both early and throughout pregnancy may reduce the risk of pre-eclampsia in women with type 1 diabetes.