Continuous glucose monitoring in individuals undergoing gestational diabetes screening.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Among guidelines on gestational diabetes mellitus, there is an incongruity about the threshold of maternal hyperglycemia to diagnose gestational diabetes mellitus. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to ascertain the association between continuous glucose monitoring metrics and adverse outcomes among individuals undergoing gestational diabetes mellitus screening. STUDY DESIGN: This was a prospective study (from June 2020 to January 2022) of individuals who underwent 2-step gestational diabetes mellitus screening at ≤30 weeks of gestation. The participants wore a blinded continuous glucose monitoring device (Dexcom G6 Pro; Dexcom, Inc, San Diego, CA) for 10 days starting when they took the 50-g glucose challenge test. The primary outcome was a composite of adverse neonatal outcomes (large for gestational age, shoulder dystocia or neonatal injury, respiratory distress, need for intravenous glucose treatment for hypoglycemia, or fetal or neonatal death). The secondary neonatal outcomes included preterm birth, neonatal intensive care unit admission, hypoglycemia, mechanical ventilation or continuous positive airway pressure, hyperbilirubinemia, and hospital length of stay. The secondary maternal outcomes included weight gain during pregnancy, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, induction of labor, cesarean delivery, and postpartum complications. Time within the target range (63-140 mg/dL), time above the target range (>140 mg/dL) expressed as a percentage of all continuous glucose monitoring readings, and mean glucose level were analyzed. The Youden index was used to choose the threshold of ≥10% for the time above the target range and association with adverse outcomes. RESULTS: Of 136 participants recruited, data were available from 92 individuals (67.6%). The 2-step method diagnosed gestational diabetes mellitus in 2 individuals (2.2%). Continuous glucose monitoring indicated that 17 individuals (18.5%) had time above the target range of ≥10%. Individuals with time above the target range of ≥10% had a significantly higher likelihood of composite adverse neonatal outcomes than individuals with time above the target range of <10% (63% vs 18%; P=.001). Furthermore, compared with neonates born to individuals with time above the target range of <10%, neonates born to individuals with time above the target range of ≥10% had an increased likelihood for hypoglycemia (14.5% vs 47%; P=.009) and had a longer length of stay (2 vs 4 days; P=.03). No difference in maternal outcomes was noted between the groups. CONCLUSION: In this prospective study of individuals undergoing gestational diabetes mellitus screening, a cutoff of the time above the target range of ≥10% using continuous glucose monitoring was associated with a higher rate of neonatal adverse outcomes. A randomized trial of continuous glucose monitoring vs 2-step screening for gestational diabetes mellitus to lower the rate of adverse outcomes is underway (identification number NCT05430204).