Neonatal outcomes according to different glucose threshold values in gestational diabetes: a register-based study.

BACKGROUND: Mild hyperglycaemia is associated with increased birth weight but association with other neonatal outcomes is controversial. We aimed to study neonatal outcomes in untreated mild hyperglycaemia using different oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) thresholds. METHODS: This register-based study included all (n = 4,939) singleton pregnant women participating a 75 g 2-h OGTT in six delivery hospitals in Finland in 2009. Finnish diagnostic cut-offs for GDM were fasting ≥ 5.3, 1 h ≥ 10.0 or 2-h glucose ≥ 8.6 mmol/L. Women who did not meet these criteria but met the International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria (fasting 5.1-5.2 mmol/L and/or 2-h glucose 8.5 mmol/L, n = 509) or the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) criteria (2-h glucose 7.8-8.5 mmol/L, n = 166) were considered as mild untreated hyperglycaemia. Women who met both the Finnish criteria and the IADPSG or the NICE criteria were considered as treated GDM groups (n = 1292 and n = 612, respectively). Controls were normoglycaemic according to all criteria (fasting glucose < 5.1 mmol/L, 1-h glucose < 10.0 mmol/L and 2-h glucose < 8.5 mmol/L, n = 3031). Untreated mild hyperglycemia groups were compared to controls and treated GDM groups. The primary outcome - a composite of adverse neonatal outcomes, including neonatal hypoglycaemia, hyperbilirubinaemia, birth trauma or perinatal mortality - was analysed using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: The risk for the adverse neonatal outcome in untreated mild hyperglycemia was not increased compared to controls (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71-1.44, using the IADPSG criteria; aOR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.60-1.85, using the NICE criteria). The risk was lower compared to the treated IADPSG (aOR 0.38, 95% CI 0.27-0.53) or the treated NICE group (aOR 0.32, 95% CI 0.18-0.57). DISCUSSION: The risk of adverse neonatal outcomes was not increased in mild untreated hyperglycaemia compared to normoglycaemic controls and was lower than in the treated GDM groups. The OGTT cut-offs of 5.3 mmol/L at fasting and 8.6 mmol/L at 2 h seem to sufficiently identify clinically relevant GDM, without excluding neonates with a risk of adverse outcomes.

National and regional prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus in India: a systematic review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is frequently misdiagnosed during pregnancy. There is an abundance of evidence, but little is known regarding the regional prevalence estimates of GDM in India. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to provide valuable insights into the national and regional prevalence of GDM among pregnant women in India. METHODS: We conducted an initial article search on PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and ShodhGanga searches to identify quantitative research papers (database inception till 15th June,2022). This review included prevalence studies that estimated the occurrence of GDM across different states in India. RESULTS: Two independent reviewers completed the screening of 2393 articles, resulting in the identification of 110 articles that met the inclusion criteria, which collectively provided 117 prevalence estimates. Using a pooled estimate calculation (with an Inverse square heterogeneity model), the pooled prevalence of GDM in pregnant women was estimated to be 13%, with a 95% confidence interval (CI) ranging from 9 to 16%.. In India, Diabetes in Pregnancy Study of India (DIPSI) was the most common diagnostic criteria used, followed by International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) and World Health Organization (WHO) 1999. It was observed that the rural population has slightly less prevalence of GDM at 10.0% [6.0-13.0%, I2=96%] when compared to the urban population where the prevalence of GDM was 12.0% [9.0-16.0%, I2 = 99%]. CONCLUSIONS: This review emphasizes the lack of consensus in screening and diagnosing gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), leading to varied prevalence rates across Indian states. It thoroughly examines the controversies regarding GDM screening by analyzing population characteristics, geographic variations, diagnostic criteria agreement, screening timing, fasting vs. non-fasting approaches, cost-effectiveness, and feasibility, offering valuable recommendations for policy makers. By fostering the implementation of state-wise screening programs, it can contribute to improving maternal and neonatal outcomes and promoting healthier pregnancies across the country.

The first International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups summit on the diagnosis of gestational diabetes in early pregnancy: TOBOGM Summit Report.

The first International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups Summit on the diagnosis of gestational diabetes in early pregnancy (Treatment of Booking Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (TOBOGM) Summit) was held on the 17 November 2022 in Sydney, Australia. It sought to use the TOBOGM trial findings to scope the issues involved with early screening, to inform future discussions over possible approaches for diagnosing gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in early pregnancy. Most delegates supported testing for early GDM using a one-step 75 g oral glucose tolerance test approach with Canadian Diabetes Association criteria preferred, but highlighted the importance of considering resources, cost, consumer perspectives and equity in translating TOBOGM results into a clinical approach to screening for, and diagnosing, early GDM.

Predicting insulin use among women with gestational diabetes diagnosed in oral glucose tolerance test.

BACKGROUND: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is one of the most common complications affecting pregnant women. While most women will achieve adequate glycemic levels with diet and exercise, some will require pharmacological treatment to reach and maintain glucose levels between the desired thresholds. Identifying these patients early in pregnancy could help direct resources and interventions. METHODS: This retrospective cohort of women with GDM diagnosed with an abnormal 75g-OGTT presents data from 869 patients (724 in the diet group and 145 in the insulin group). Univariate logistic regression was used to compare the groups, and multivariable logistic regression was used to identify independent factors associated with the need for insulin. A log-linear function was used to estimate the probability of requiring pharmacological treatment. RESULTS: Women in the insulin group had higher pre-pregnancy BMI index (29.8 vs 27.8 kg/m2, odds ratio [OR] 1.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-1.09), more frequent history of previous GDM (19.4% vs. 7.8%, OR 2.84, 95% CI 1.59-5.05), were more likely to have chronic hypertension (31.7% vs. 23.2%, OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.04-2.27), and had higher glucose levels at all three OGTT points. Multivariable logistic regression final model included age, BMI, previous GDM status, and the three OGTT values as predictors of insulin requirement. CONCLUSIONS: We can use regularly collected data from patients (age, BMI, previous GDM status, and the three OGTT values) to calculate the risk of a woman with GDM diagnosed in OGTT needing insulin. Identifying patients with a greater risk of requiring pharmacological treatment could help healthcare services to better allocate resources and offer closer follow-up to high-risk patients.

Effect of interventions in pregnant women with mildly impaired glucose tolerance.

AIM: In 2010, the Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology (JSOG) changed the diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) to follow the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Group (IADPSG) criteria. As a result, many pregnant women with mildly impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) were newly diagnosed with GDM. This study aimed to verify the effects of interventions in pregnant women with mild IGT who were newly diagnosed with GDM based on the present JSOG criteria. METHODS: We defined mild IGT as a degree of IGT that would be diagnosed as GDM according to the present but not the previous JSOG criteria. We compared pregnancy and delivery outcomes in women with mild IGT who delivered a singleton at 22 weeks of gestation or later, between 2000 and 2009 (untreated group, n = 503) versus between 2011 and 2017 (treated group, n = 781). RESULTS: The incidence of GDM-related composite complications such as macrosomia, shoulder dystocia, neonatal hypoglycemia, neonatal hyperbilirubinemia, and neonatal respiratory distress syndrome was comparable in the untreated and treated groups (10.1% vs. 11.9%, p = 0.11). The pregnancy outcomes were also comparable, except for infant birth weights, which were lower in the treated group than in the untreated group (3014 g vs. 3094 g; p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Pregnancy outcomes were not affected by the interventions in pregnant women with mild IGT.

Impact of introducing the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria on pregnancy outcomes in Japan.

To estimate pregnancy complications in women newly diagnosed with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) according to the new International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria and verify the validity of introducing the IADPSG criteria in Japan. This retrospective study included data from women with singleton delivery at 22 weeks or later at a tertiary hospital during 2000-2009. We compared pregnancy outcomes between women who would now be diagnosed with GDM according to the IADPSG criteria but not by the old JSOG criteria (IGT group, n = 503) and women with normal glucose tolerance according to both the criteria (NGT group, n = 2,789). Multivariate analysis was performed and adjusted for background factors. Maternal age at delivery and pre-pregnancy BMI were significantly higher in the IGT group than in the NGT group, while gestational weeks at delivery did not differ between the groups. No difference was observed in the rates of GDM-related composite complications (defined as cases with at least one of the following: macrosomia, shoulder dystocia, neonatal hypoglycemia, neonatal hyperbilirubinemia, or neonatal respiratory distress syndrome) at 11.9% and 8.8% (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90-1.87, p = 0.16). Pregnancy outcomes did not differ significantly between the IGT and NGT groups, except for frequencies of total neonatal admissions at 10.5% and 7.1%, respectively (adjusted OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.12-2.13, p < 0.01).

What is known and what remains unresolved regarding gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM).

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) has become a major public health issue and one of the most discussed topics in contemporary obstetrics. Due to rising prevalence of GDM worldwide impact and importance of this medical condition in good quality antenatal care is growing. GDM is associated with serious adverse perinatal outcomes and unfavorable long-term health consequences for both, mother and her child. Despite a great amount of knowledge accumulated regarding GDM, medical community remains indecisive and still debates the most appropriate diagnostic strategy, screening policy, and treatment options for pregnancies complicated with GDM. These unresolved issues generate controversies, motivate further research and contribute to the growing interest surrounding GDM. In this review we will discuss and try to explain some of them.

Change in prevalence of gestational diabetes and obstetric complications when applying IADPSG screening criteria in a Belgian French speaking University Hospital. A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In April 2012 our institution chose to switch from a two- step criteria for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM) screening, to the International Association of Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Group (IADSPG) criteria. This shift led to an increased prevalence of GDM in our pregnant population. We designed a study in order to estimate the magnitude of the increase in GDM prevalence before and after the switch in screening strategy. As a secondary objective we wanted to evaluate if there was a significant difference between the two periods in the percentage of maternal and neonatal complications such as gestational hypertensive disorders (GHD), primary cesarean section (pCS), preterm birth, large for gestational age (LGA) newborns, macrosomia, shoulder dystocia, 5' Apgar score less than to 7 at birth, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) transfer and neonatal hypoglycemia. METHODS: We selected retrospectively 3496 patients who delivered between January 2009 and December 2011 who were screened with the two-step criteria (group A), and compared them to 2555 patients who delivered between January 2013 and December 2014 and who were screened with IADPSG criteria (Group B). We checked patients' electronic files to establish GDM status, baseline characteristics (age, body mass index, nationality, parity) and the presence of maternal and neonatal complications. RESULTS: GDM prevalence increased significantly from group A (3.4%; 95%CI 2.8-4.06%) to group B (16.28%; 95%CI 14.8 -17.7%). In group B there were significantly more non-Belgian and primiparous patients. There was no statistically significant difference in maternal and neonatal complications between the two groups, even after adjustment for nationality and parity. There was a non-significant reduction of the proportion of macrosomic and of LGA babies. CONCLUSIONS: In our population the introduction of IADPSG screening criteria has increased the prevalence of GDM without having a statistically significant impact on pregnancy outcomes.

First trimester prediction of gestational diabetes mellitus using plasma biomarkers: a case-control study.

Objectives To evaluate the first trimester maternal biomarkers for early pregnancy prediction of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Methods The study was a case-control study of healthy women with singleton pregnancies at the first trimester carried out at the Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, Clinica Davila, Santiago, Chile. After obtaining informed consent, peripheral blood samples of pregnant women under 14 weeks of gestation were collected. At 24-28 weeks of pregnancy, women were classified as GDM (n=16) or controls (n=80) based on the results of a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). In all women, we measured concentrations of fasting blood glucose, insulin, glycated hemoglobin, uric acid, cholesterol, high density lipoprotein (HDL), low density lipoprotein (LDL), very low density lipoprotein (VLDL), triglycerides, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), γ-glutamyl transpeptidase (GGT), alkaline phosphatase (AP), sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG), adiponectin, tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA), leptin and placental growth factor (PGF). Results The GDM group displayed an increased median concentration of cholesterol (P=0.04), triglycerides (P=0.003), insulin (P=0.003), t-PA (P=0.0088) and homeostatic model assessment (HOMA) (P=0.003) and an increased mean concentration of LDL (P=0.009) when compared to the control group. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for significant variables achieved an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.870, a sensitivity of 81.4% and a specificity of 80.0%. The OGTT was positive for GDM according to the IADPSG (International Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Group) criteria. Conclusion Women who subsequently developed GDM showed higher levels of blood-borne biomarkers during the first trimester, compared to women who did not develop GDM. These data warrant validation in a larger cohort.

The incidence of gestational diabetes mellitus before and after the introduction of HAPO diagnostic criteria.

INTRODUCTION: During the years 2014-2015 new diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) were gradually adopted by the Czech professional societies, which emerged from the results of the large prospective multicenter HAPO study (The Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome). The adoption of the new criteria was accompanied by concerns about the increase in the number of women with GDM. The paper deals with epidemiological results of GDM incidence in the first three years since the introduction of new criteria. METHODS AND RESULTS: In the years 2013-2014 GDM screening was performed at 1,594 pregnant woman at the General Teaching Hospital in Prague. According to that time valid diagnostic criteria (fasting glucose 5.6 mmol/g and/or 8.9 mmol/l in 60 min and/or 7.7 mmol/l in 120 min 75 g OGTT) GDM was found in 324, i.e. 20 % of women. In the years 2016-2018 were 2,629 pregnant women examined. GDM based on the new criteria (fasting blood glucose 5.1 mmol/l and/or 10 mmol/l in 60 min and/or 8.5 mmol/l in 120 min OGTT) was diagnosed in significantly less women - in 375, i.e. 14.3% (p < 0.0001). Overt diabetes, i.e. fasting glucose 7.0 mmol/l and/or 11.1 mmol/l in 120 min OGTT, was newly detected in 6 pregnant women, i.e. 0.2 %. Gestational diabetes was found in 62% cases based on repeated fasting fasting blood glucose and in 38% on the basis of higher blood glucose at 60 min and/or 120 min OGTT. GDM was significantly more prevalent in the age category over 30 years. Among women aged under 25 years GDM was present at 9.9%, aged 25-29.9 years at 9.6%, aged 30-34.9 years at 14.2% and aged 35 years at 18.6 %. Hypoglycaemia < 3.5 mmol/l experienced 2.9% of women during OGTT. When the screening in 2016-2018 was evaluated according to the previous diagnostic criteria, diabetes would be diagnosed in 16.2% of pregnant women. The result of the test would be falsely negative in 6% of all pregnant women, i.e. these women have repeatedly higher fasting glucose (5.1-5.5 mmol/l) according to the current criteria which was evaluated as physiological according to the previous criteria. However, in the HAPO, these values were already associated with a significant increase of complications. A total of 50% of women with GDM diagnosed according to the previous criteria would have a false positive result of OGTT (8.9-9.9 mmol/l in 60 min and/or 7.7-8.4 mmol/l in 120 min OGTT). These values are not considered to be significantly at risk under the new criteria. CONCLUSION: Our data do not confirm the increase in GDM incidence following the introduction of new diagnostic criteria which, according to current knowledge, better reflect the real risks of complications for the child and the mother. Applying the previous criteria has led to a number of false negative and positive results, so we consider the adoption of better-funded new criteria a step in the right direction. The incidence of diabetes was significant in all age categories and significantly increased in women over 30 years of age.

Prevalence and risk factors of gestational diabetes mellitus: findings from a universal screening feasibility program in Lima, Peru.

BACKGROUND: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a global public health concern with potential implications for the health of a mother and her offspring. However, data on the prevalence and risk factors of GDM in Latin America are scarce. The study was designed to estimate the prevalence of GDM and identify maternal risk factors among Peruvian women. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 1300 pregnant women attending a prenatal clinic in Lima, Peru. GDM was diagnosed using an Oral Glucose Tolerance Test (OGTT) performed between 24 and 28 gestational weeks using the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria. Depression status was assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to identify risk factors of GDM. RESULTS: Approximately 16% of pregnant women were diagnosed with GDM. The prevalence of obesity and depression were 24.4 and 10.6%, respectively. After adjusting for confounders, mid-pregnancy obesity was associated with a 1.64-fold increased odds of GDM (OR: 1.64; 95% CI: 1.03-2.61). Participants with a family history of diabetes had a 1.5-fold increased odds of developing GDM (OR: 1.51, 95% CI: 1.10-2.07) as compared to women without this family history. Depression was associated with a 1.54-fold increased odds of GDM (OR: 1.54; 95% CI:1.09-2.17). CONCLUSIONS: GDM is highly prevalent and was associated with maternal obesity, family history of diabetes and antepartum depression among Peruvian women. Intervention programs aimed at early diagnoses and management of GDM need to take maternal obesity, family history of diabetes and antepartum depression into account.

Application of One-Step IADPSG Versus Two-Step Diagnostic Criteria for Gestational Diabetes in the Real World: Impact on Health Services, Clinical Care, and Outcomes.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This paper seeks to summarize the impact of the one-step International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) versus the two-step gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) criteria with regard to prevalence, outcomes, healthcare delivery, and long-term maternal metabolic risk. RECENT FINDINGS: Studies demonstrate a 1.03-3.78-fold rise in the prevalence of GDM with IADPSG criteria versus baseline criteria. Women with GDM by IADPSG criteria have more adverse pregnancy outcomes than women with normal glucose tolerance (NGT). Treatment of GDM by IADPSG criteria may be cost effective. Use of the fasting glucose as a screen before the 75-g oral glucose tolerance test to rule out GDM with fasting plasma glucose (FPG) < 4.4 (80 mg/dl) and rule in GDM with FPG ≥ 5.1 mmol/l (92 mg/dl) reduces the need for OGTT by 50% and its cost and inconvenience. The prevalence of postpartum abnormal glucose metabolism is higher for women with GDM diagnosed by IADPSG criteria versus that for women with NGT. Data support the use of IADPSG criteria, if the cost of diagnosis and treatment can be controlled and if lifestyle can be optimized to reduce the risk of future diabetes.

Early pregnancy probiotic supplementation with Lactobacillus rhamnosus HN001 may reduce the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus: a randomised controlled trial.

The study aims to assess whether supplementation with the probiotic Lactobacillus rhamnosus HN001 (HN001) can reduce the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). A double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled parallel trial was conducted in New Zealand (NZ) (Wellington and Auckland). Pregnant women with a personal or partner history of atopic disease were randomised at 14-16 weeks' gestation to receive HN001 (6×109 colony-forming units) (n 212) or placebo (n 211) daily. GDM at 24-30 weeks was assessed using the definition of the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) (fasting plasma glucose ≥5·1 mmol/l, or 1 h post 75 g glucose level at ≥10 mmol/l or at 2 h ≥8·5 mmol/l) and NZ definition (fasting plasma glucose ≥5·5 mmol/l or 2 h post 75 g glucose at ≥9 mmol/l). All analyses were intention-to-treat. A total of 184 (87 %) women took HN001 and 189 (90 %) women took placebo. There was a trend towards lower relative rates (RR) of GDM (IADPSG definition) in the HN001 group, 0·59 (95 % CI 0·32, 1·08) (P=0·08). HN001 was associated with lower rates of GDM in women aged ≥35 years (RR 0·31; 95 % CI 0·12, 0·81, P=0·009) and women with a history of GDM (RR 0·00; 95 % CI 0·00, 0·66, P=0·004). These rates did not differ significantly from those of women without these characteristics. Using the NZ definition, GDM prevalence was significantly lower in the HN001 group, 2·1 % (95 % CI 0·6, 5·2), v. 6·5 % (95 % CI 3·5, 10·9) in the placebo group (P=0·03). HN001 supplementation from 14 to 16 weeks' gestation may reduce GDM prevalence, particularly among older women and those with previous GDM.

Analysis of the main risk factors for gestational diabetes diagnosed with International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria in multiple pregnancies.

INTRODUCTION: The aim is to investigate the proportion of multiple pregnancies with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) diagnosed using the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria and to identify the impact of age, body mass index (BMI), and mode of conception on incidence of GDM. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a single center, retrospective cohort study on 656 multiple pregnancies screened for GDM with 75-g, 2-h oral glucose tolerance test at 24-28 weeks of gestation, between January 2010 and January 2016. The diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) was reached through the IADPSG. RESULTS: The incidence of GDM in our population was 15.1%. When patients who conceived through heterologous assisted reproduction technology were compared with those who conceived spontaneously, there was a significant difference for GDM (31.1 vs 13.6%, p < 0.001, OR 2.86). A similar finding was also observed comparing egg donation IVF/ICSI patients with homologous IVF/ICSI patients (31.1 vs 14.8%, p = 0.006, OR 2.59). Incidence of GDM was significantly higher in obese than in non-obese patients (42.5 vs 14.8%, p < 0.001, OR 4.88) and in women over 35 compared to younger patients (18.4 vs 11.1%, p = 0.01, OR 1.81). Logistic regression comparing the diabetes onset with conception mode gave a p = 0.07. The calculation of the Chi-square and odds ratio for single mode of conception showed that homologous vs conceived spontaneously p = 0.90, OR 0.97, heterologous vs homologous p = 0.01 with OR 2.46, and heterologous vs conceived spontaneously p = 0.01 with OR 2.39. Logistic regression showed that age and BMI are risk factors for developing GDM, respectively, p = 0.03 with OR 1.4 and p < 0.01 and OR 1.09. DISCUSSION: The contribution our study can make is improved counseling about GDM risks for couples with multiple pregnancies. Our data support the role of age, BMI, and mode of conception as risk factors for GDM in multiple pregnancies.

Fourfold increase in prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus after adoption of the new International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria.

BACKGROUND: The aim was to evaluate the influence of the new International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) guidelines for screening of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) on GDM prevalence in a cohort from a Swiss tertiary hospital. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study involving all pregnant women who were screened for GDM between 24 and 28 weeks of gestation. From 2008 until 2010 (period 1), a two-step approach with 1-h 50 g glucose challenge test (GCT) was used, followed by fasting, 1- and 2-h glucose measurements after a 75 g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in case of a positive GCT. From 2010 until 2013 (period 2), all pregnant women were tested with a one-step 75 g OGTT according to new IADPSG guidelines. In both periods, women with risk factors could be screened directly with a 75 g OGTT in early pregnancy. RESULTS: Overall, 647 women were eligible for the study in period 1 and 720 in period 2. The introduction of the IADPSG criteria resulted in an absolute increase of GDM prevalence of 8.5% (3.3% in period 1 to 11.8% in period 2). CONCLUSIONS: The adoption of the IADPSG criteria resulted in a considerable increase in GDM diagnosis in our Swiss cohort. Further studies are needed to investigate if the screening is cost effective and if treatment of our additionally diagnosed GDM mothers might improve short-term as well as long-term outcome.

The IADPSG diagnostic criteria identify women with increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes in Victoria.

Controversy remains surrounding International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Group (IADPSG) diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), including perceived improvement in perinatal outcomes and health service implications. We compared perinatal outcomes for untreated women meeting IADPSG-only criteria and women without GDM in Victoria. Women meeting IADPSG-only criteria were characterised according to fasting and one hour glucose thresholds and by region of birth. IADPSG criteria identified women with increased risk of adverse perinatal outcomes, particularly women born in Australia compared to Asian regions.

Gestational diabetes mellitus and the predisposing factors.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the occurrence of gestational diabetes mellitus and its association with demographic and anthropometric variables in pregnant women. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted at the Aga Khan University Hospital, Abbasi Shaheed Hospital and Memon Hospital in Karachi, from February 2014 to December 2015, and comprised pregnant women who were screened by 75-g 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test, (24-28 weeks of gestation) and classified as per the criteria of the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Group. Weight, body mass index and serum glycated haemoglobin levels were measured. Women with pre-gestational diabetes were excluded. SPSS 21 was used for data analysis. RESULTS: Of the 1,210 participants, 208(17.2%) had gestational diabetes, while 1,002(82.8%) did not have the condition. Gestational diabetes was associated with advancing age, deranged glycated haemoglobin, elevated body mass index at booking (p<0.001) and history of first-degree type 2 diabetic relatives (p=0.05). When stratified according to ethnicities, no difference was observed in terms of gestational diabetes predilection among those who had the condition (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Pre-existing adiposity and presence of strong family history rendered a considerable number of pregnant women to suffer from gestational diabetes.

Prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus in Rafsanjan: a comparison of different criteria.

BACKGROUND: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is common during pregnancy. This survey was designed based on the frequency of GDM among an urban population according to the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria. METHODS: We included all pregnant women who were admitted to a gynecology clinic from September 2012 until May 2013. The fasting blood sugar (FBS) was measured. Those having FBS≥ 126 mg/dl were excluded from the study. All women underwent a standard OGTT (oral glucose tolerance test) by ingesting 75g of glucose in the 24th to 32nd week of their pregnancy. RESULTS: Two hundred ninety pregnant women with a mean±SD age of 27.72±5.091 years were included in the study. The mean±SD FBS, blood glucose one hour and two hours after ingesting 75g of glucose were 82.48±9.41, 146.86±34.22 and 114.21±27.79 mg/ dl, respectively. Based on the criteria of the ADA, 9.3% (n= 27) of the admitted patients suffered from GDM. For the IADPSG and the WHO, those numbers were 31% (n= 90) and 15.2% (n= 44), respectively. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of GDM was 1.5-times and 3 times higher when the IADPSG based data were compared to those of the WHO or the ADA.

Gestational diabetes mellitus among Nordic Caucasian women: prevalence and risk factors according to WHO and simplified IADPSG criteria.

BACKGROUND: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with both maternal and offspring adverse effects. The World Health Organization (WHO) has recently adopted novel GDM criteria. The aim of this study was to evaluate the former WHO and a simplified version of the new International Association for Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Group (IADPSG) criteria as to prevalence of and risk factors for GDM in a Nordic Caucasian population. METHODS: A 75 g oral glucose tolerance test was performed in 687 women at 18-22 and 32-36 pregnancy weeks. GDM was defined according to the WHO criteria as fasting plasma glucose ≥ 7.0 mmol/L and/or 2-hour plasma glucose ≥ 7.8 mmol/L and by a simplified version of the IADPSG criteria as either fasting glucose ≥ 5.1 mmol/L and/or 2-h plasma glucose ≥ 8.5 mmol/L. One-hour glucose values were not available and were thus not included in the diagnosis of GDM by IADPSG. Prevalence of GDM during pregnancy and risk factors for GDM at 18-22 weeks were studied in retrospect according to each of the two criteria. RESULTS: The total prevalence of GDM during pregnancy was 6.1% (42/687) for the WHO criteria and 7.4% (51/687) for the simplified IADPSG criteria. High maternal age and short stature were independently associated with WHO GDM. Maternal age, fasting insulin and no regular exercise at 18-22 pregnancy weeks associated with simplified IADPSG GDM. CONCLUSIONS: Simplified IADPSG criteria moderately increase GDM prevalence compared with the WHO criteria. Risk factors for GDM differ with the diagnostic criteria used.

Are the new IADPSG criteria for gestational diabetes useful in a country with a very high prevalence?

The International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups released new recommendations on screening methods and diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes. The main objectives of the present study were to analyze characteristics of mothers who underwent the new screening test, and to assess the prevalence of gestational diabetes and related pregnancy complications such as the 5-minute Apgar score <7, in a urban maternity clinic in Djibouti. The effect of treating gestational diabetes was also evaluated. Totally, 231 mothers underwent the new screening test, and 106 were diagnosed as having gestational diabetes (45.9%). Mothers with gestational diabetes had an excess risk of low Apgar scores, even after adjustment for socio-economic and medical covariates, with an odds ratio of 6.34 (1.77-22.66), p value <0.005. Only 46.2% of mothers with gestational diabetes followed the recommendations regarding treatment. Among these patients, 18.6% of infants from untreated mothers had a 5-minute Apgar score <7, compared to 3.9% infants from treated mothers (p value = 0.017). After adjustment, untreated mothers still had a high excess risk of low Apgar scores, although non-significant, with an odds ratio of 4.67 (0.78-27.87), p value = 0.09. In conclusion, gestational diabetes is highly prevalent in Djibouti and is related to low Apgar scores.