Intrapartum maternal glycaemic control for the prevention of neonatal hypoglycaemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Neonatal hypoglycaemia is the most common metabolic disorder in infants, and may be influenced by maternal glycaemic control. This systematic review evaluated the effect of intrapartum maternal glycaemic control on neonatal hypoglycaemia. METHODS: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, non-randomised studies of interventions, and cohort or case-control studies that examined interventions affecting intrapartum maternal glycaemic control compared to no or less stringent control. We searched four databases and three trial registries to November 2023. Quality assessments used Cochrane Risk of Bias 1 or the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Meta-analysis was performed using random-effects models analysed separately for women with or without diabetes. The review was registered prospectively on PROSPERO (CRD42022364876). RESULTS: We included 46 studies of women with diabetes and five studies of women without diabetes: one RCT, 32 cohort and 18 case-control studies (11,273 participants). For women with diabetes, the RCT showed little to no difference in the incidence of neonatal hypoglycaemia between tight versus less tight intrapartum glycaemic control groups (76 infants, RR 1.00 (0.45, 2.24), p = 1.00, low certainty evidence). However, 11 cohort studies showed tight intrapartum glycaemic control may reduce neonatal hypoglycaemia (6,152 infants, OR 0.44 (0.31, 0.63), p < 0.00001, I2 = 58%, very low certainty evidence). For women without diabetes, there was insufficient evidence to determine the effect of tight intrapartum glycaemic control on neonatal hypoglycaemia. CONCLUSIONS: Very uncertain evidence suggests that tight intrapartum glycaemic control may reduce neonatal hypoglycaemia in infants of women with diabetes. High-quality RCTs are required.

Magnesium Sulfate Before Preterm Birth for Neuroprotection: An Updated Cochrane Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the evidence for the effectiveness and safety of magnesium sulfate as a fetal neuroprotective agent when given to individuals at risk of preterm birth. DATA SOURCES: We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (through March 17, 2023), and reference lists of relevant studies. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing magnesium sulfate for fetal neuroprotection in pregnant participants at risk of imminent preterm birth were eligible. Two authors assessed RCTs for inclusion, extracted data, and evaluated risk of bias, trustworthiness, and evidence certainty (GRADE [Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation]). TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: We included six RCTs (5,917 pregnant participants and 6,759 fetuses at less than 34 weeks of gestation at randomization). They were conducted in high-income countries (two in the United States, two across Australia and New Zealand, and one each in Denmark and France) and commenced between 1995 and 2018. Primary outcomes: up to 2 years of corrected age, magnesium sulfate compared with placebo reduced the risk of cerebral palsy (risk ratio [RR] 0.71, 95% CI, 0.57-0.89; six RCTs, 6,107 children) and death or cerebral palsy (RR 0.87, 95% CI, 0.77-0.98; six RCTs, 6,481 children) (high-certainty evidence). Magnesium sulfate had little or no effect on death up to 2 years of corrected age (moderate-certainty evidence) or these outcomes at school age (low-certainty evidence). Although there was little or no effect on death or cardiac or respiratory arrest for pregnant individuals (low-certainty evidence), magnesium sulfate increased adverse effects severe enough to stop treatment (RR 3.21, 95% CI, 1.88-5.48; three RCTs, 4,736 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Secondary outcome: magnesium sulfate reduced the risk of severe neonatal intraventricular hemorrhage (moderate-certainty evidence). CONCLUSION: Magnesium sulfate for preterm fetal neuroprotection reduces cerebral palsy and death or cerebral palsy for children. Further research is required on longer-term benefits and harms for children, effect variation by participant and treatment characteristics, and the generalizability of findings to low- and middle-income countries. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: The review protocol was based on a standard Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth template and our previous Cochrane Systematic Review (doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004661.pub3; published before the introduction of PROSPERO).

Magnesium sulphate for women at risk of preterm birth for neuroprotection of the fetus.

BACKGROUND: Magnesium sulphate is a common therapy in perinatal care. Its benefits when given to women at risk of preterm birth for fetal neuroprotection (prevention of cerebral palsy for children) were shown in a 2009 Cochrane review. Internationally, use of magnesium sulphate for preterm cerebral palsy prevention is now recommended practice. As new randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and longer-term follow-up of prior RCTs have since been conducted, this review updates the previously published version. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of magnesium sulphate as a fetal neuroprotective agent when given to women considered to be at risk of preterm birth. SEARCH METHODS: We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) on 17 March 2023, as well as reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs and cluster-RCTs of women at risk of preterm birth that assessed prenatal magnesium sulphate for fetal neuroprotection compared with placebo or no treatment. All methods of administration (intravenous, intramuscular, and oral) were eligible. We did not include studies where magnesium sulphate was used with the primary aim of preterm labour tocolysis, or the prevention and/or treatment of eclampsia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed RCTs for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and trustworthiness. Dichotomous data were presented as summary risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), and continuous data were presented as mean differences with 95% CI. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included six RCTs (5917 women and their 6759 fetuses alive at randomisation). All RCTs were conducted in high-income countries. The RCTs compared magnesium sulphate with placebo in women at risk of preterm birth at less than 34 weeks' gestation; however, treatment regimens and inclusion/exclusion criteria varied. Though the RCTs were at an overall low risk of bias, the certainty of evidence ranged from high to very low, due to concerns regarding study limitations, imprecision, and inconsistency. Primary outcomes for infants/children: Up to two years' corrected age, magnesium sulphate compared with placebo reduced cerebral palsy (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.89; 6 RCTs, 6107 children; number needed to treat for additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 60, 95% CI 41 to 158) and death or cerebral palsy (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.98; 6 RCTs, 6481 children; NNTB 56, 95% CI 32 to 363) (both high-certainty evidence). Magnesium sulphate probably resulted in little to no difference in death (fetal, neonatal, or later) (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.13; 6 RCTs, 6759 children); major neurodevelopmental disability (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.44; 1 RCT, 987 children); or death or major neurodevelopmental disability (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.07; 3 RCTs, 4279 children) (all moderate-certainty evidence). At early school age, magnesium sulphate may have resulted in little to no difference in death (fetal, neonatal, or later) (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.02; 2 RCTs, 1758 children); cerebral palsy (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.41; 2 RCTs, 1038 children); death or cerebral palsy (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.20; 1 RCT, 503 children); and death or major neurodevelopmental disability (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.12; 1 RCT, 503 children) (all low-certainty evidence). Magnesium sulphate may also have resulted in little to no difference in major neurodevelopmental disability, but the evidence is very uncertain (average RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.62; 2 RCTs, 940 children; very low-certainty evidence). Secondary outcomes for infants/children: Magnesium sulphate probably reduced severe intraventricular haemorrhage (grade 3 or 4) (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.98; 5 RCTs, 5885 infants; NNTB 92, 95% CI 55 to 1102; moderate-certainty evidence) and may have resulted in little to no difference in chronic lung disease/bronchopulmonary dysplasia (average RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.10; 5 RCTs, 6689 infants; low-certainty evidence). Primary outcomes for women: Magnesium sulphate may have resulted in little or no difference in severe maternal outcomes potentially related to treatment (death, cardiac arrest, respiratory arrest) (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.92; 4 RCTs, 5300 women; low-certainty evidence). However, magnesium sulphate probably increased maternal adverse effects severe enough to stop treatment (average RR 3.21, 95% CI 1.88 to 5.48; 3 RCTs, 4736 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Secondary outcomes for women: Magnesium sulphate probably resulted in little to no difference in caesarean section (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.02; 5 RCTs, 5861 women) and postpartum haemorrhage (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.09; 2 RCTs, 2495 women) (both moderate-certainty evidence). Breastfeeding at hospital discharge and women's views of treatment were not reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The currently available evidence indicates that magnesium sulphate for women at risk of preterm birth for neuroprotection of the fetus, compared with placebo, reduces cerebral palsy, and death or cerebral palsy, in children up to two years' corrected age, and probably reduces severe intraventricular haemorrhage for infants. Magnesium sulphate may result in little to no difference in outcomes in children at school age. While magnesium sulphate may result in little to no difference in severe maternal outcomes (death, cardiac arrest, respiratory arrest), it probably increases maternal adverse effects severe enough to stop treatment. Further research is needed on the longer-term benefits and harms for children, into adolescence and adulthood. Additional studies to determine variation in effects by characteristics of women treated and magnesium sulphate regimens used, along with the generalisability of findings to low- and middle-income countries, should be considered.

Prenatal Magnesium Sulfate and Functional Connectivity in Offspring at Term-Equivalent Age.

Importance: Understanding the effect of antenatal magnesium sulfate (MgSO4) treatment on functional connectivity will help elucidate the mechanism by which it reduces the risk of cerebral palsy and death. Objective: To determine whether MgSO4 administered to women at risk of imminent preterm birth at a gestational age between 30 and 34 weeks is associated with increased functional connectivity and measures of functional segregation and integration in infants at term-equivalent age, possibly reflecting a protective mechanism of MgSO4. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study was nested within a randomized placebo-controlled trial performed across 24 tertiary maternity hospitals. Participants included infants born to women at risk of imminent preterm birth at a gestational age between 30 and 34 weeks who participated in the MAGENTA (Magnesium Sulphate at 30 to 34 Weeks' Gestational Age) trial and underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at term-equivalent age. Ineligibility criteria included illness precluding MRI, congenital or genetic disorders likely to affect brain structure, and living more than 1 hour from the MRI center. One hundred and fourteen of 159 eligible infants were excluded due to incomplete or motion-corrupted MRI. Recruitment occurred between October 22, 2014, and October 25, 2017. Participants were followed up to 2 years of age. Analysis was performed from February 1, 2021, to February 27, 2024. Observers were blind to patient groupings during data collection and processing. Exposures: Women received 4 g of MgSO4 or isotonic sodium chloride solution given intravenously over 30 minutes. Main Outcomes and Measures: Prior to data collection, it was hypothesized that infants who were exposed to MgSO4 would show enhanced functional connectivity compared with infants who were not exposed. Results: A total of 45 infants were included in the analysis: 24 receiving MgSO4 treatment and 21 receiving placebo; 23 (51.1%) were female and 22 (48.9%) were male; and the median gestational age at scan was 40.0 (IQR, 39.1-41.1) weeks. Treatment with MgSO4 was associated with greater voxelwise functional connectivity in the temporal and occipital lobes and deep gray matter structures and with significantly greater clustering coefficients (Hedge g, 0.47 [95% CI, -0.13 to 1.07]), transitivity (Hedge g, 0.51 [95% CI, -0.10 to 1.11]), local efficiency (Hedge g, 0.40 [95% CI, -0.20 to 0.99]), and global efficiency (Hedge g, 0.31 [95% CI, -0.29 to 0.90]), representing enhanced functional segregation and integration. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, infants exposed to MgSO4 had greater voxelwise functional connectivity and functional segregation, consistent with increased brain maturation. Enhanced functional connectivity is a possible mechanism by which MgSO4 protects against cerebral palsy and death.

Umbilical cord milking and delayed cord clamping for the prevention of neonatal hypoglycaemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Placental management strategies such as umbilical cord milking and delayed cord clamping may provide a range of benefits for the newborn. The aim of this review was to assess the effectiveness of umbilical cord milking and delayed cord clamping for the prevention of neonatal hypoglycaemia. METHODS: Three databases and five clinical trial registries were systematically reviewed to identify randomised controlled trials comparing umbilical cord milking or delayed cord clamping with control in term and preterm infants. The primary outcome was neonatal hypoglycaemia (study defined). Two independent reviewers conducted screening, data extraction and quality assessment. Quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (RoB-2). Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Meta-analysis using a random effect model was done using Review Manager 5.4. The review was registered prospectively on PROSPERO (CRD42022356553). RESULTS: Data from 71 studies and 14 268 infants were included in this review; 22 (2 537 infants) compared umbilical cord milking with control, and 50 studies (11 731 infants) compared delayed with early cord clamping. For umbilical cord milking there were no data on neonatal hypoglycaemia, and no differences between groups for any of the secondary outcomes. We found no evidence that delayed cord clamping reduced the incidence of hypoglycaemia (6 studies, 444 infants, RR = 0.87, CI: 0.58 to 1.30, p = 0.49, I2 = 0%). Delayed cord clamping was associated with a 27% reduction in neonatal mortality (15 studies, 3 041 infants, RR = 0.73, CI: 0.55 to 0.98, p = 0.03, I2 = 0%). We found no evidence for the effect of delayed cord clamping for any of the other outcomes. The certainty of evidence was low for all outcomes. CONCLUSION: We found no data for the effectiveness of umbilical cord milking on neonatal hypoglycaemia, and no evidence that delayed cord clamping reduced the incidence of hypoglycaemia, but the certainty of the evidence was low.

Cardiovascular outcomes 50 years after antenatal exposure to betamethasone: Follow-up of a randomised double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Antenatal corticosteroids for women at risk of preterm birth reduce neonatal morbidity and mortality, but there is limited evidence regarding their effects on long-term health. This study assessed cardiovascular outcomes at 50 years after antenatal exposure to corticosteroids. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We assessed the adult offspring of women who participated in the first randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of antenatal betamethasone for the prevention of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) (1969 to 1974). The first 717 mothers received 2 intramuscular injections of 12 mg betamethasone or placebo 24 h apart and the subsequent 398 received 2 injections of 24 mg betamethasone or equivalent volume of placebo. Follow-up included a health questionnaire and consent to access administrative data sources. The co-primary outcomes were the prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors (any of hypertension, hyperlipidaemia, diabetes mellitus, gestational diabetes mellitus, or prediabetes) and age at first major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, coronary revascularisation, stroke, admission for peripheral vascular disease, and admission for heart failure). Analyses were adjusted for gestational age at entry, sex, and clustering. Of 1,218 infants born to 1,115 mothers, we followed up 424 (46% of survivors; 212 [50%] female) at mean (standard deviation) age 49.3 (1.0) years. There were no differences between those exposed to betamethasone or placebo for cardiovascular risk factors (159/229 [69.4%] versus 131/195 [67.2%]; adjusted relative risk 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.89, 1.18;]; p = 0.735) or age at first MACE (adjusted hazard ratio 0.58, 95% CI [0.23, 1.49]; p = 0.261). There were also no differences in the components of these composite outcomes or in any of the other secondary outcomes. Key limitations were follow-up rate and lack of in-person assessments. CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence that antenatal corticosteroids increase the prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors or incidence of cardiovascular events up to 50 years of age. Established benefits of antenatal corticosteroids are not outweighed by an increase in adult cardiovascular disease.

Early Feeding for the Prevention of Neonatal Hypoglycaemia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Poor feeding, among other factors, predisposes neonates to hypoglycaemia. Early feeding is widely recommended to prevent hypoglycaemia in those at risk, but the effectiveness of this is uncertain. This review aimed to summarise and analyse the evidence on the effectiveness of early feeding for prevention of neonatal hypoglycaemia. METHODS: Four databases and three clinical trial registries were searched from inception to May 24, 2023. Published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, cluster randomised trials, non-randomised studies of interventions, and observational studies with comparison groups were considered for inclusion with no language or publication date restrictions. We included studies of neonates who were fed early (within 60 min of birth or study defined) versus delayed. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 1 tool or Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment tool. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. RevMan 5.4.1 or R was used to synthesise results in random-effects meta-analyses. This review was registered prospectively with PROSPERO (CRD42022378904). RESULTS: A total of 175,392 participants were included across 19 studies, of which two were RCTs, 14 cohort studies, two cross-sectional studies, and one a case-control study. Most studies (13/19) were conducted in low- or lower-middle-income countries. Early feeding may be associated with reduced neonatal hypoglycaemia (four cohort studies, 744 infants, odds ratio [OR] 0.19 (95% CI: 0.10-0.35), p < 0.00001, I2 = 44%) and slightly reduced duration of initial hospital stay (one cohort study, 1,673 infants, mean difference: -0.20 days [95% CI: -0.31 to -0.09], p = 0.0003), but the evidence is very uncertain. One RCT found early feeding had little or no effect on the risk of neonatal mortality, but three cohort studies found early feeding may be associated with reduced risk (136,468 infants, OR 0.51 [95% CI: 0.37-0.72]; low certainty evidence; p <0.0001; I2 = 54%). CONCLUSION: We found that early feeding may reduce the incidence of neonatal hypoglycaemia, but the evidence is very uncertain. Given its many other benefits, early feeding should continue to be recommended. This review was primarily funded by the Aotearoa Foundation and the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) of the National Institutes of Health.

Impact of Gestational Diabetes Detection Thresholds on Infant Growth and Body Composition: A Prospective Cohort Study Within a Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with offspring metabolic disease, including childhood obesity, but causal mediators remain to be established. We assessed the impact of lower versus higher thresholds for detection and treatment of GDM on infant risk factors for obesity, including body composition, growth, nutrition, and appetite. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this prospective cohort study within the Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Trial of Diagnostic Detection Thresholds (GEMS), pregnant women were randomly allocated to detection of GDM using the lower criteria of the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups or higher New Zealand criteria (ACTRN12615000290594). Randomly selected control infants of women without GDM were compared with infants exposed to A) GDM by lower but not higher criteria, with usual treatment for diabetes in pregnancy; B) GDM by lower but not higher criteria, untreated; or C) GDM by higher criteria, treated. The primary outcome was whole-body fat mass at 5-6 months. RESULTS: There were 760 infants enrolled, and 432 were assessed for the primary outcome. Fat mass was not significantly different between control infants (2.05 kg) and exposure groups: A) GDM by lower but not higher criteria, treated (1.96 kg), adjusted mean difference (aMD) -0.09 (95% CI -0.29, 0.10); B) GDM by lower but not higher criteria, untreated (1.94 kg), aMD -0.15 (95% CI -0.35, 0.06); and C) GDM detected and treated using higher thresholds (1.87 kg), aMD -0.17 (95% CI -0.37, 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: GDM detected using lower but not higher criteria, was not associated with increased infant fat mass at 5-6 months, regardless of maternal treatment. GDM detected and treated using higher thresholds was also not associated with increased fat mass at 5-6 months.

Prevalence and determinants of perinatal mental disorders in women with gestational diabetes in New Zealand: Findings from a national longitudinal study.

INTRODUCTION: Concurrent diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus and mental disorders is associated with adverse outcomes for mother and child, but there is limited information about prevalence or which women are at risk. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study was a prospective cohort study of women with gestational diabetes from 10 hospitals in New Zealand who reported anxiety (6-item Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory), depression (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale) and health-related quality of life (36-Item Short-Form General Health Survey) at time of gestational diabetes diagnosis (baseline), 36 weeks' gestation, and 6 months postpartum. Potential predictors were assessed using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 414 respondents, 17% reported anxiety, 16% vulnerability to depression and 27% poor mental health-related quality of life at time of gestational diabetes diagnosis. At 36 weeks' gestation, prevalence decreased for vulnerability to depression (8%) and poor mental health-related quality of life (20%). Younger maternal age, Pacific ethnicity, previous history of gestational diabetes, and older gestational age at time of gestational diabetes diagnosis were associated with poorer mental health outcomes. At 6 months postpartum the prevalence of mental disorders did not differ from in late pregnancy and they were associated with later gestational age at time of gestational diabetes diagnosis and elevated 2-hour postprandial glucose concentrations. CONCLUSIONS: Perinatal mental disorders are common at time of diagnosis among women with gestational diabetes in New Zealand and had decreased by late pregnancy and at 6 months after birth. These disorders are more common among women with specific risk factors who may therefore benefit from additional support.

Maternal ethnicity and gestational age at birth predict hypoglycaemia among neonates of mothers with gestational diabetes.

AIM: Hypoglycaemia is common in neonates born to mothers with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). We aimed to determine predictors of hypoglycaemia among neonates of women with GDM and association with short-term outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a secondary cohort analysis of data from a multi-centre randomised trial (the TARGET trial) conducted across ten maternity hospitals in New Zealand between May 2015 and November 2017. Data were analysed using univariate analysis and multivariable forward stepwise logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 1085 neonates, those born to Asian mothers had reduced odds of hypoglycaemia (OR [95% CI]: 0.54 [0.38, 0.75], p = 0.001), as did those born at higher gestational ages (0.76 [0.68, 0.85], p < 0.001). Neonates born to Pacific mothers had increased odds of hypoglycaemia (OR [95% CI]: 1.57 [1.04, 2.39], p = 0.034). Neonates who experienced hypoglycaemia were more likely to experience neonatal intensive care unit admission (8.3% vs. 2.1%; p ≤ 0.001), hyperbilirubinaemia (8.6% vs. 3.3%; p ≤ 0.001) and receive respiratory support (11.4% vs. 4.8%; p ≤ 0.001) and less likely to be breastfed at discharge (92.4% vs. 96.2%; p = 0.009). CONCLUSION: Among neonates of women with GDM, maternal ethnicity and gestation at birth are independent predictors of hypoglycaemia, and hypoglycaemia is associated with short-term comorbidities. Additional surveillance may be appropriate for neonates in these high-risk groups.

Do glycaemic treatment targets affect the perinatal mental health status of women with gestational diabetes? - Data from the TARGET Trial.

BACKGROUND: Gestational diabetes mellitus is associated with perinatal mental disorders. Effective management may reduce this risk, but there is little evidence on effects of different glycaemic treatment targets. We assessed whether tight glycaemic treatment targets compared with less-tight targets reduce the risk of poor mental health outcomes in women with gestational diabetes. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of data from women who consented to complete perinatal mental health questionnaires as participants in the TARGET Trial, a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial in 10 hospitals in New Zealand. All hospitals initially used less tight glycaemic targets for management of gestational diabetes and were sequentially randomized, in clusters of two at 4-monthly intervals, to using tighter glycaemic targets. Data were collected from 414 participants on anxiety (6-item Spielberger State Anxiety scale), depression (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale), and health-related quality of life (36-Item Short-Form General Health Survey) at the time of diagnosis (baseline), 36 weeks of gestation, and 6 months postpartum. The primary outcome was composite poor mental health (any of anxiety, vulnerability to depression, or poor mental health-related quality of life). Generalized linear mixed models were used to determine the main treatment effect with 95% confidence intervals using an intention-to-treat approach. RESULTS: We found no differences between randomised glycaemic target groups in the primary outcome at 36 weeks' (relative risk (RR): 1.07; 95% confidence interval 0.58, 1.95) and 6 months postpartum (RR: 1.03; 0.58, 1.81). There were similarly no differences in the components of the primary outcome at 36 weeks' [anxiety (RR: 0.85; 0.44, 1.62), vulnerability to depression (RR: 1.10; 0.43, 2.83), or poor mental health-related quality of life (RR: 1.05; 0.50, 2.20)] or at 6 months postpartum [anxiety (RR:1.21; 0.59, 2.48), vulnerability to depression (RR:1.41; 0.53, 3.79), poor mental health-related quality of life (RR: 1.11; 0.59, 2.08)]. CONCLUSION: We found no evidence that adoption of tighter glycaemic treatment targets in women with gestational diabetes alters their mental health status at 36 weeks' gestation and at 6 months postpartum. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR). ACTRN12615000282583 (ANZCTR-Registration). Date of registration: 25 March 2015.

Skin-to-skin contact for the prevention of neonatal hypoglycaemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Skin-to-skin contact between mother and infant after birth is recommended to promote breastfeeding and maternal-infant bonding. However, its impact on the incidence of neonatal hypoglycaemia is unknown. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess this. METHODS: Published randomised control trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, non-randomised studies of interventions, cohort, or case-control studies with an intervention of skin-to-skin care compared to other treatment were included without language or date restrictions. The primary outcome was neonatal hypoglycaemia (study-defined). We searched 4 databases and 4 trial registries from inception to May 12th, 2023. Quality of studies was assessed using Cochrane Risk of Bias 1 or Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment tools. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Results were synthesised using RevMan 5.4.1 or STATA and analysed using random-effects meta-analyses where possible, otherwise with direction of findings tables. This review was registered prospectively on PROSPERO (CRD42022328322). RESULTS: This review included 84,900 participants in 108 studies, comprising 65 RCTs, 16 quasi-RCTs, seven non-randomised studies of intervention, eight prospective cohort studies, nine retrospective cohort studies and three case-control studies. Evidence suggests skin-to-skin contact may result in a large reduction in the incidence of neonatal hypoglycaemia (7 RCTs/quasi-RCTs, 922 infants, RR 0.29 (0.13, 0.66), p < 0.0001, I2 = 47%). Skin-to-skin contact may reduce the incidence of admission to special care or neonatal intensive care nurseries for hypoglycaemia (1 observational study, 816 infants, OR 0.50 (0.25-1.00), p = 0.050), but the evidence is very uncertain. Skin-to-skin contact may reduce duration of initial hospital stay after birth (31 RCTs, 3437 infants, MD -2.37 (-3.66, -1.08) days, p = 0.0003, I2 = 90%, p for Egger's test = 0.02), and increase exclusive breastmilk feeding from birth to discharge (1 observational study, 1250 infants, RR 4.30 (3.19, 5.81), p < 0.0001), but the evidence is very uncertain. CONCLUSION: Skin-to-skin contact may lead to a large reduction in the incidence of neonatal hypoglycaemia. This, along with other established benefits, supports the practice of skin-to-skin contact for all infants and especially those at risk of hypoglycaemia.

Different intensities of glycaemic control for women with gestational diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) has major short- and long-term implications for both the mother and her baby. GDM is defined as a carbohydrate intolerance resulting in hyperglycaemia or any degree of glucose intolerance with onset or first recognition during pregnancy from 24 weeks' gestation onwards and which resolves following the birth of the baby. Rates for GDM can be as high as 25% depending on the population and diagnostic criteria used, and overall rates are increasing globally. There is wide variation internationally in glycaemic treatment target recommendations for women with GDM that are based on consensus rather than high-quality trials. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of different intensities of glycaemic control in pregnant women with GDM on maternal and infant health outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (26 September 2022), and reference lists of the retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-RCTs, and quasi-RCTs. Trials were eligible for inclusion if women were diagnosed with GDM during pregnancy and the trial compared tighter and less-tight glycaemic targets during management. We defined tighter glycaemic targets as lower numerical glycaemic concentrations, and less-tight glycaemic targets as higher numerical glycaemic concentrations. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods for carrying out data collection, assessing risk of bias, and analysing results. Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility for inclusion, evaluated risk of bias, and extracted data for the four included studies. We assessed the certainty of evidence for selected outcomes using the GRADE approach. Primary maternal outcomes included hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and subsequent development of type 2 diabetes. Primary infant outcomes included perinatal mortality, large-for-gestational-age, composite of mortality or serious morbidity, and neurosensory disability. MAIN RESULTS: This was an update of a previous review completed in 2016. We included four RCTs (reporting on 1731 women) that compared a tighter glycaemic control with less-tight glycaemic control in women diagnosed with GDM. Three studies were parallel RCTs, and one study was a stepped-wedged cluster-RCT. The trials took place in Canada, New Zealand, Russia, and the USA. We judged the overall risk of bias to be unclear. Two trials were only published in abstract form. Tight glycaemic targets used in the trials ranged between ≤ 5.0 and 5.1 mmol/L for fasting plasma glucose and ≤ 6.7 and 7.4 mmol/L postprandial. Less-tight targets for glycaemic control used in the included trials ranged between < 5.3 and 5.8 mmol/L for fasting plasma glucose and < 7.8 and 8.0 mmol/L postprandial. For the maternal outcomes, compared with less-tight glycaemic control, the evidence suggests a possible increase in hypertensive disorders of pregnancy with tighter glycaemic control (risk ratio (RR) 1.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80 to 1.69, 2 trials, 1491 women; low certainty evidence); however, the 95% CI is compatible with a wide range of effects that encompass both benefit and harm. Tighter glycaemic control likely results in little to no difference in caesarean section rates (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.17, 3 studies, 1662 women; moderate certainty evidence) or induction of labour rates (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.18, 1 study, 1096 women; moderate certainty evidence) compared with less-tight control. No data were reported for the outcomes of subsequent development of type 2 diabetes, perineal trauma, return to pre-pregnancy weight, and postnatal depression. For the infant outcomes, it was difficult to determine if there was a difference in perinatal mortality (RR not estimable, 2 studies, 1499 infants; low certainty evidence), and there was likely no difference in being large-for-gestational-age (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.29, 3 studies, 1556 infants; moderate certainty evidence). The evidence suggests a possible reduction in the composite of mortality or serious morbidity with tighter glycaemic control (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.29, 3 trials, 1559 infants; low certainty evidence); however, the 95% CI is compatible with a wide range of effects that encompass both benefit and harm. There is probably little difference between groups in infant hypoglycaemia (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.18, 3 studies, 1556 infants; moderate certainty evidence). Tighter glycaemic control may not reduce adiposity in infants of women with GDM compared with less-tight control (mean difference -0.62%, 95% CI -3.23 to 1.99, 1 study, 60 infants; low certainty evidence), but the wide CI suggests significant uncertainty. We found no data for the long-term outcomes of diabetes or neurosensory disability. Women assigned to tighter glycaemic control experienced an increase in the use of pharmacological therapy compared with women assigned to less-tight glycaemic control (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.59, 4 trials, 1718 women). Tighter glycaemic control reducedadherence with treatment compared with less-tight glycaemic control (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.51, 1 trial, 395 women). Overall the certainty of evidence assessed using GRADE ranged from low to moderate, downgraded primarily due to risk of bias and imprecision. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review is based on four trials (1731 women) with an overall unclear risk of bias. The trials provided data on most primary outcomes and suggest that tighter glycaemic control may increase the risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. The risk of birth of a large-for-gestational-age infant and perinatal mortality may be similar between groups, and tighter glycaemic targets may result in a possible reduction in composite of death or severe infant morbidity. However, the CIs for these outcomes are wide, suggesting both benefit and harm. There remains limited evidence regarding the benefit of different glycaemic targets for women with GDM to minimise adverse effects on maternal and infant health. Glycaemic target recommendations from international professional organisations vary widely and are currently reliant on consensus given the lack of high-certainty evidence. Further high-quality trials are needed, and these should assess both short- and long-term health outcomes for women and their babies; include women's experiences; and assess health services costs in order to confirm the current findings. Two trials are ongoing.

Expressed breast milk and maternal expression of breast milk for the prevention and treatment of neonatal hypoglycemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Worldwide, many guidelines recommend the use of expressed breast milk (EBM) and maternal expression of breast milk for the prevention and treatment of neonatal hypoglycemia. However, the impact of both practices on neonatal hypoglycemia is unclear. This study aims to determine the effectiveness of EBM and maternal expression of breast milk in preventing and treating neonatal hypoglycemia. METHODS: We registered our review in PROSPERO (CRD42022328072). We systematically reviewed five databases and four clinical trial registries to identify randomized controlled trials (RCT), non-randomized studies of intervention (NRSI), and cohort studies that compared infants who received EBM to infants who did not, and similar study designs that compared infants whose mothers expressed breast milk to infants whose mothers did not. Two independent reviewers carried out screening, data extraction, and quality assessment. The quality of included RCT, NRSI, and cohort studies were respectively assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2, Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies-of Interventions, and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale tools. Results from studies on EBM were synthesized separately from those on maternal expression of breast milk. Meta-analysis was undertaken using Revman 5.4. and fixed-effect models. RESULTS: None of the ten included studies was specifically designed to determine the effect of EBM or maternal expression of breast milk on neonatal hypoglycemia. The effect of EBM on neonatal hypoglycemia was not estimable. There was no difference in the risk of hypoglycaemia among neonates whose mothers expressed breast milk compared to those whose mothers did not [RR (95%CI); one RCT: 0.92 (0.77, 1.10), high-certainty evidence; one cohort: 1.10 (0.74, 1.39), poor quality study]. CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of EBM for preventing or treating neonatal hypoglycemia. Limited data suggests maternal breast milk expression may not alter the risk of neonatal hypoglycemia. High-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the effectiveness of EBM and maternal expression of breast milk for the prevention and treatment of neonatal hypoglycemia.

Midwife or doctor leader to implement a national guideline in babies on postnatal wards (DesIGN): A cluster-randomised, controlled, trial.

The aim of this trial was to determine if midwives or doctor leaders are more effective at implementing a clinical practice guideline for oral dextrose gel to treat neonatal hypoglycaemia. This was a cluster-randomised, controlled, trial. New Zealand maternity hospitals were randomised to guideline implementation by a midwife or doctor implementation leader. The primary outcome was the change in the proportion of hypoglycaemic babies (blood glucose concentration <2.6 mmol/L in the first 48 hours after birth), treated with dextrose gel from before, to three months after, implementation. Twenty-one maternity hospitals that cared for babies at risk of hypoglycaemia consented to participate, of which 15 treated babies with hypoglycaemia at both time points (7 randomised to midwifery led, 8 randomised to doctor led implementation). The primary outcome included 463 hypoglycaemic babies (292 midwifery led, 171 doctor led implementation). There was no difference in the primary outcome between hospitals randomised to midwifery or doctor led implementation (proportion treated with gel, mean(SD); midwifery led: before 71 (38)%, 3 months after 87 (12)%; doctor led: before 63 (43)%, 3 months after 86 (16)%; adjusted mean change in proportion (95%CI); 19.3% (-4.5-43.1), p = 0.11). There was an increase in the proportion of eligible babies treated with oral dextrose gel from before to 3 months after implementation of the guideline (122/153 (80%) v 144/163 (88%), OR (95%CI); 3.42 (1.67-6.98), p<0.001). Implementation of a clinical practice guideline improved uptake of oral dextrose gel. There was no evidence of a difference between midwife and doctor implementation leaders for implementing this guideline for treatment of hypoglycaemic babies. The trial was prospectively registered on the ISRCTN registry on the 20/05/2015 (ISRCTN61154098).

Prenatal Intravenous Magnesium at 30-34 Weeks' Gestation and Neurodevelopmental Outcomes in Offspring: The MAGENTA Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Intravenous magnesium sulfate administered to pregnant individuals before birth at less than 30 weeks' gestation reduces the risk of death and cerebral palsy in their children. The effects at later gestational ages are unclear. Objective: To determine whether administration of magnesium sulfate at 30 to 34 weeks' gestation reduces death or cerebral palsy at 2 years. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial enrolled pregnant individuals expected to deliver at 30 to 34 weeks' gestation and was conducted at 24 Australian and New Zealand hospitals between January 2012 and April 2018. Intervention: Intravenous magnesium sulfate (4 g) was compared with placebo. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was death (stillbirth, death of a live-born infant before hospital discharge, or death after hospital discharge before 2 years' corrected age) or cerebral palsy (loss of motor function and abnormalities of muscle tone and power assessed by a pediatrician) at 2 years' corrected age. There were 36 secondary outcomes that assessed the health of the pregnant individual, infant, and child. Results: Of the 1433 pregnant individuals enrolled (mean age, 30.6 [SD, 6.6] years; 46 [3.2%] self-identified as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, 237 [16.5%] as Asian, 82 [5.7%] as Maori, 61 [4.3%] as Pacific, and 966 [67.4%] as White) and their 1679 infants, 1365 (81%) offspring (691 in the magnesium group and 674 in the placebo group) were included in the primary outcome analysis. Death or cerebral palsy at 2 years' corrected age was not significantly different between the magnesium and placebo groups (3.3% [23 of 691 children] vs 2.7% [18 of 674 children], respectively; risk difference, 0.61% [95% CI, -1.27% to 2.50%]; adjusted relative risk [RR], 1.19 [95% CI, 0.65 to 2.18]). Components of the primary outcome did not differ between groups. Neonates in the magnesium group were less likely to have respiratory distress syndrome vs the placebo group (34% [294 of 858] vs 41% [334 of 821], respectively; adjusted RR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.76 to 0.95]) and chronic lung disease (5.6% [48 of 858] vs 8.2% [67 of 821]; adjusted RR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.48 to 0.99]) during the birth hospitalization. No serious adverse events occurred; however, adverse events were more likely in pregnant individuals who received magnesium vs placebo (77% [531 of 690] vs 20% [136 of 667], respectively; adjusted RR, 3.76 [95% CI, 3.22 to 4.39]). Fewer pregnant individuals in the magnesium group had a cesarean delivery vs the placebo group (56% [406 of 729] vs 61% [427 of 704], respectively; adjusted RR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.84 to 0.99]), although more in the magnesium group had a major postpartum hemorrhage (3.4% [25 of 729] vs 1.7% [12 of 704] in the placebo group; adjusted RR, 1.98 [95% CI, 1.01 to 3.91]). Conclusions and Relevance: Administration of intravenous magnesium sulfate prior to preterm birth at 30 to 34 weeks' gestation did not improve child survival free of cerebral palsy at 2 years, although the study had limited power to detect small between-group differences. Trial Registration: anzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12611000491965.

Antenatal dietary supplementation with myo-inositol for preventing gestational diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Gestational diabetes with onset or first recognition during pregnancy is an increasing problem worldwide. Myo-inositol, an isomer of inositol, is a naturally occurring sugar commonly found in cereals, corn, legumes and meat. Myo-inositol is one of the intracellular mediators of the insulin signal and correlates with insulin sensitivity in type 2 diabetes. The potential beneficial effect of improving insulin sensitivity suggests that myo-inositol may be useful for women in preventing gestational diabetes. This is an update of a review first published in 2015. OBJECTIVES: To assess if antenatal dietary supplementation with myo-inositol is safe and effective, for the mother and fetus, in preventing gestational diabetes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP (17 March 2022) and the reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) including cluster-RCTs and conference abstracts, assessing the effects of myo-inositol for the prevention of gestational diabetes in pregnant women. We included studies that compared any dose of myo-inositol, alone or in a combination preparation, with no treatment, placebo or another intervention. Quasi-randomised and cross-over trials were not eligible. We excluded women with pre-existing type 1 or type 2 diabetes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted the data. We checked the data for accuracy. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included seven RCTs (one conducted in Ireland, six conducted in Italy) reporting on 1319 women who were 10 weeks to 24 weeks pregnant at the start of the studies. The studies had relatively small sample sizes and the overall risk of bias was low. For the primary maternal outcomes, meta-analysis showed that myo-inositol may reduce the incidence of gestational diabetes (risk ratio (RR) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31 to 0.90; 6 studies, 1140 women) and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.61; 5 studies, 1052 women). However, the certainty of the evidence was low to very low. For the primary neonatal outcomes, only one study measured the risk of a large-for-gestational-age infant and found myo-inositol was associated with both appreciable benefit and harm (RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.65 to 3.02; 1 study, 234 infants; low-certainty evidence). None of the included studies reported on the other primary neonatal outcomes (perinatal mortality, mortality or morbidity composite). For the secondary maternal outcomes, we are unclear about the effect of myo-inositol on weight gain during pregnancy (mean difference (MD) -0.25 kilogram (kg), 95% CI -1.26 to 0.75 kg; 4 studies, 831 women) and perineal trauma (RR 4.0, 95% CI 0.45 to 35.25; 1 study, 234 women) because the evidence was assessed as being very low-certainty. Further, myo-inositol may result in little to no difference in caesarean section (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.07; 4 studies, 829 women; low-certainty evidence). None of the included studies reported on the other secondary maternal outcomes (postnatal depression and the development of subsequent type 2 diabetes mellitus). For the secondary neonatal outcomes, meta-analysis showed no neonatal hypoglycaemia (RR 3.07, 95% CI 0.90 to 10.52; 4 studies; 671 infants; very low-certainty evidence). However, myo-inositol may be associated with a reduction in the incidence of preterm birth (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.70; 4 studies; 829 infants). There were insufficient data for a number of maternal and neonatal secondary outcomes, and no data were reported for any of the long-term childhood or adulthood outcomes, or for health service utilisation outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from seven studies shows that antenatal dietary supplementation with myo-inositol during pregnancy may reduce the incidence of gestational diabetes, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and preterm birth. Limited data suggest that supplementation with myo-inositol may not reduce the risk of a large-for-gestational-age infant.  The current evidence is based on small studies that were not powered to detect differences in outcomes such as perinatal mortality and serious infant morbidity. Six of the included studies were conducted in Italy and one in Ireland, which raises concerns about the lack of generalisability to other settings. There is evidence of inconsistency among doses of myo-inositol, the timing of administration and study population. As a result, we downgraded the certainty of the evidence for many outcomes to low or very low certainty. Further studies for this promising antenatal intervention for preventing gestational diabetes are encouraged and should include pregnant women of different ethnicities and varying risk factors. Myo-inositol at different doses, frequency and timing of administration, should be compared with placebo, diet and exercise, and pharmacological interventions. Long-term follow-up should be considered and outcomes should include potential harms, including adverse effects.