Prediction of large-for-gestational-age infant by fetal growth charts and hemoglobin A1c level in pregnancy complicated by pregestational diabetes.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the ability of three fetal growth charts (Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF), Hadlock and National Institutes of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) race/ethnicity-specific) to predict large-for-gestational age (LGA) at birth in pregnant individuals with pregestational diabetes, and to determine whether inclusion of hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) level improves the predictive performance of the growth charts. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of individuals with Type-1 or Type-2 diabetes with a singleton pregnancy that resulted in a non-anomalous live birth. Fetal biometry was performed between 28 + 0 and 36 + 6 weeks of gestation. The primary exposure was suspected LGA, defined as estimated fetal weight ≥ 90th percentile using the Hadlock (Formula C), FMF and NICHD growth charts. The primary outcome was LGA at birth, defined as birth weight ≥ 90th percentile, using 2017 USA natality reference data. The performance of the three growth charts to predict LGA at birth, alone and in combination with HbA1c as a continuous measure, was assessed using the area under the receiver-operating-characteristics curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value. RESULTS: Of 358 assessed pregnant individuals with pregestational diabetes (34% with Type 1 and 66% with Type 2), 147 (41%) had a LGA infant at birth. Suspected LGA was identified in 123 (34.4%) by the Hadlock, 152 (42.5%) by the FMF and 152 (42.5%) by the NICHD growth chart. The FMF growth chart had the highest sensitivity (77% vs 69% (NICHD) vs 63% (Hadlock)) and the Hadlock growth chart had the highest specificity (86% vs 76% (NICHD) and 82% (FMF)) for predicting LGA at birth. The FMF growth chart had a significantly higher AUC (0.79 (95% CI, 0.74-0.84)) for LGA at birth compared with the NICHD (AUC, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.68-0.77); P < 0.001) and Hadlock (AUC, 0.75 (95% CI, 0.70-0.79); P < 0.01) growth charts. Prediction of LGA improved for all three growth charts with the inclusion of HbA1c measurement in comparison to each growth chart alone (P < 0.001 for all); the FMF growth chart remained more predictive of LGA at birth (AUC, 0.85 (95% CI, 0.81-0.90)) compared with the NICHD (AUC, 0.79 (95% CI, 0.73-0.84)) and Hadlock (AUC, 0.81 (95% CI, 0.76-0.86)) growth charts. CONCLUSIONS: The FMF fetal growth chart had the best predictive performance for LGA at birth in comparison with the Hadlock and NICHD race/ethnicity-specific growth charts in pregnant individuals with pregestational diabetes. Inclusion of HbA1c improved further the prediction of LGA for all three charts. © 2022 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Prior breastfeeding experience and infant feeding at discharge among women with pregestational diabetes mellitus.

OBJECTIVE: To compare multiparous women with pregestational diabetes mellitus (PGDM) with and without prior breastfeeding (BF) experience and to ascertain their infants' feeding type during hospitalization and at discharge. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 304 women with PGDM who delivered at ≥34 weeks gestational age (GA). Prior BF experience and infant feeding preference was declared prenatally. At discharge, BF was defined as exclusive or partial. RESULTS: BF experience and no experience groups were similar in diabetes type 1 and 2, race and number of pregnancies. Women with no experience had more spontaneous abortions (35 vs 27%), fewer term deliveries (51 vs 61%) and living children (median 1 vs 2). In the current pregnancy, mode of delivery: vaginal (36 & 37%), cesarean (64 & 63%), birthweight (3592 & 3515 g), GA (38 & 37 w), NICU admission (14 & 11%) and hypoglycemia (44 & 43%) were similar. Women with experience intended to BF (79 vs 46%), their infants' first feeding was BF (64 vs 36%) and had lactation consults (96 vs 63%) more often than those without experience. At discharge, women with BF experience were different in rate of exclusive BF (33 vs 11%), partial BF (48 vs 25%) and formula feeding (19 vs 64%). CONCLUSION: Prior BF experience leads to better BF initiation rates while the absence of BF experience adds a risk for BF initiation failure. A detailed BF history could provide insight into obstacles that lead to unsuccessful BF experiences and may help define appropriate preventive or corrective strategies.