An audit of the maternal medicine clinic: Cancer and pregnancy.

AIMS: To explore the incidence and complexity of women presenting for maternity care who require concurrent cancer care, and to report the birth outcomes of these women. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective audit of women attending a 'high risk' maternal medicine clinic at an Australian tertiary maternity hospital between 1 October 2021 and 30 April 2023 was conducted. The inclusion criteria were a diagnosis of cancer and a concurrent pregnancy, or a diagnosis of cancer prior to the current pregnancy. Clinic lists and coding data were screened via the electronic medical record to identify potential subjects. Data were collected from the individual maternity and neonatal records. RESULTS: Forty of 705 (5.7%) women attending the maternal medicine clinic met the inclusion criteria, of which ten had a new diagnosis of cancer in pregnancy and 30 presented for maternity care after a previous diagnosis of cancer. Cancer therapy during pregnancy included surgery and chemotherapy. Most pregnancies (92.5%) resulted in term deliveries (≥37 weeks gestation). Four neonates were preterm, and one was small-for-gestational-age. Caesarean section delivery and post-partum haemorrhage were more common than expected, but the rate of other adverse pregnancy outcomes was consistent with the background population. Over half of neonates required neonatal intensive care unit / special care nursery admission but the indications for admission were common, self-limiting conditions, and the length of stay was short (mean <5.0 days). CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 6% of women attending the maternal medicine clinic had a current or previous diagnosis of cancer. Most pregnancies resulted in term deliveries and neonatal outcomes were excellent.

WHAM-A Prospective Study of Weight and Body Composition After Risk-Reducing Bilateral Salpingo-oophorectomy.

CONTEXT: Body weight and composition may change over the natural menopause transition. Whether surgical menopause has similar effects, and the impact of hormone replacement therapy (HRT), are unknown. Understanding the metabolic effects of surgical menopause will inform clinical care. OBJECTIVE: To prospectively measure weight and body composition over 24 months following surgical menopause compared with a similar comparison group who retained their ovaries. METHODS: Prospective observational study of weight change from baseline to 24 months in 95 premenopausal women at elevated risk of ovarian cancer planning risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) and 99 comparators who retained their ovaries. Change in body composition from baseline to 24 months was also assessed by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry in a subgroup of 54 women who underwent RRSO and 81 comparators who retained their ovaries. In the subgroup, weight, fat mass, lean mass, and abdominal fat measures were compared between groups. RESULTS: At 24 months both groups had gained weight (RRSO 2760 ± 4860 g vs comparators 1620 ± 4540 g) with no difference between groups (mean difference 730 g; 95% CI 920 g to 2380 g; P = .383). In the body composition subgroup, there was no difference in weight between groups at 24 months (mean difference 944 g; 95% CI -1120 g to 2614 g; P = .431). RRSO women may have gained slightly more abdominal visceral adipose tissue (mean difference 99.0 g; 95% CI 8.8 g to 189.2 g; P = .032) but there were no other differences in body composition. There were also no differences in weight or body composition between HRT users and nonusers at 24 months. CONCLUSION: 24 months after RRSO, there was no difference in body weight compared with women who retained their ovaries. RRSO women gained more abdominal visceral adipose tissue than comparators, but there were no other differences in body composition. Use of HRT following RRSO had no effect on these outcomes.

Folate Supplementation in Women with Pre-Existing Diabetes.

Folate supplementation in the periconceptual period is the standard of care for the prevention of neural tube defects. To support dietary folate intake, some countries have introduced mandatory folic acid fortification of food products. Robust evidence supports the additional use of a low-dose folic acid supplement (0.4 mg/day) in all women from 2-3 months preconception until the end of the 12th week of gestation. For women with pre-existing diabetes, high-dose folic acid supplementation (5 mg/day) is recommended in some, but not all international guidelines. The recommendation is made based on consensus opinion and reflects the increased risk of neural tube defects in pregnant women with pre-existing diabetes. However, there is limited evidence to clarify the high-risk groups that benefit from high-dose folic acid versus those that do not. There are also some data to suggest that high-dose folic acid may be harmful to mothers and offspring, although this issue remains controversial. This narrative review explores the evidence that supports the recommendation for women with pre-existing diabetes to take high-dose folic acid in the periconceptual period. It explores the potential benefits of high-dose supplemental folate beyond the prevention of neural tube defects, and also the potential adverse impacts of high-dose folate use. These topics are considered with a specific focus on the issues that are pertinent to women with pre-existing diabetes. Based on the available evidence, a pragmatic approach to the use of folic acid supplements in women with pre-existing diabetes during the periconception period is suggested. The need for comprehensive preconception care that optimises glycaemic control and addresses other modifiable risk factors before pregnancy is emphasized.

Using a Very Low Energy Diet to Achieve Substantial Preconception Weight Loss in Women with Obesity: A Review of the Safety and Efficacy.

Obesity in women of reproductive age is common. Emerging evidence suggests that maternal obesity not only increases the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes but also has an enduring impact on the metabolic health of the offspring. Given this, management of obesity prior to pregnancy is critically important. Almost all international guidelines suggest that women with obesity should aim to achieve weight loss prior to pregnancy. However, current pre-conception weight loss therapies are sub-optimal. Lifestyle modification typically results in modest weight loss. This may assist fertility but does not alter pregnancy outcomes. Bariatric surgery results in substantial weight loss, which improves pregnancy outcomes for the mother but may be harmful to the offspring. Alternative approaches to the management of obesity in women planning pregnancy are needed. Very low energy diets (VLEDs) have been proposed as a possible tool to assist women with obesity achieve weight loss prior to conception. While VLEDs can induce substantial and rapid weight loss, there are concerns about the impact of rapid weight loss on maternal nutrition prior to pregnancy and about inadvertent exposure of the early fetus to ketosis. The purpose of this review is to examine the existing literature regarding the safety and efficacy of a preconception VLED program as a tool to achieve substantial weight loss in women with obesity.

Impact of preconception weight loss on fasting glucose and pregnancy outcomes in women with obesity: A randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the effectiveness of a nonsurgical, preconception weight loss intervention on pregnancy outcomes in women with obesity. METHODS: This was a two-arm, parallel-group randomized controlled trial. A total of 164 women with BMI 30 to 55 kg/m2 who were aged 18 to 38 years and planning pregnancy were randomized to a 12-week standard dietary intervention (SDI; n = 79) or a modified very low-energy diet (VLED; n = 85). Participants were observed for ≤48 weeks while trying for pregnancy and then during pregnancy. The primary outcome was maternal fasting plasma glucose at 26 to 28 weeks' gestation. Exploratory outcomes were individual and composite obesity-related adverse pregnancy outcomes. RESULTS: Weight loss was greater in the VLED group (SDI 3.2 [0.6] kg vs. VLED 13.0 [0.5] kg, p < 0.01). In completers who had a singleton live birth (SDI 22/79 vs. VLED 35/85, p = 0.10), there was no difference in fasting glucose at 26 to 28 weeks' gestation (SDI 4.8[0.2] mmol/L vs. VLED 4.6 [0.1] mmol/L, p = 0.42). However, the composite of adverse pregnancy outcomes was significantly lower in the VLED group (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Substantial prepregnancy weight loss in women with obesity does not alter fasting glucose at 26 to 28 weeks' gestation but does reduce a composite of adverse pregnancy outcomes. A better understanding of metabolic changes in pregnancy after preconception weight loss may assist in improving maternal and neonatal health outcomes.

Probiotics for preventing gestational diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with a range of adverse pregnancy outcomes for mother and infant. The prevention of GDM using lifestyle interventions has proven difficult. The gut microbiome (the composite of bacteria present in the intestines) influences host inflammatory pathways, glucose and lipid metabolism and, in other settings, alteration of the gut microbiome has been shown to impact on these host responses. Probiotics are one way of altering the gut microbiome but little is known about their use in influencing the metabolic environment of pregnancy. This is an update of a review last published in 2014. OBJECTIVES: To systematically assess the effects of probiotic supplements used either alone or in combination with pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions on the prevention of GDM. SEARCH METHODS: We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (20 March 2020), and reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and cluster-randomised trials comparing the use of probiotic supplementation with either placebo or diet for the prevention of the development of GDM. Cluster-randomised trials were eligible for inclusion but none were identified. Quasi-randomised and cross-over design studies were not eligible for inclusion in this review. Studies presented only as abstracts with no subsequent full report of study results were only included if study authors confirmed that data in the abstract came from the final analysis. Otherwise, the abstract was left awaiting classification. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies. Data were checked for accuracy. MAIN RESULTS: In this update, we included seven trials with 1647 participants. Two studies were in overweight and obese women, two in obese women and three did not exclude women based on their weight. All included studies compared probiotics with placebo. The included studies were at low risk of bias overall except for one study that had an unclear risk of bias. We excluded two studies, eight studies were ongoing and three studies are awaiting classification. Six included studies with 1440 participants evaluated the risk of GDM. It is uncertain if probiotics have any effect on the risk of GDM compared to placebo (mean risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54 to 1.20; 6 studies, 1440 women; low-certainty evidence). The evidence was low certainty due to substantial heterogeneity and wide CIs that included both appreciable benefit and appreciable harm. Probiotics increase the risk of pre-eclampsia compared to placebo (RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.04 to 3.29; 4 studies, 955 women; high-certainty evidence) and may increase the risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.96 to 2.01, 4 studies, 955 women), although the CIs for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy also indicated probiotics may have no effect. There were few differences between groups for other primary outcomes. Probiotics make little to no difference in the risk of caesarean section (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.17; 6 studies, 1520 women; high-certainty evidence), and probably make little to no difference in maternal weight gain during pregnancy (MD 0.30 kg, 95% CI -0.67 to 1.26; 4 studies, 853 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Probiotics probably make little to no difference in the incidence of large-for-gestational age infants (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.36; 4 studies, 919 infants; moderate-certainty evidence) and may make little to no difference in neonatal adiposity (2 studies, 320 infants; data not pooled; low-certainty evidence). One study reported adiposity as fat mass (MD -0.04 kg, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.04), and one study reported adiposity as percentage fat (MD -0.10%, 95% CI -1.19 to 0.99). We do not know the effect of probiotics on perinatal mortality (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.02; 3 studies, 709 infants; low-certainty evidence), a composite measure of neonatal morbidity (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.35; 2 studies, 623 infants; low-certainty evidence), or neonatal hypoglycaemia (mean RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.92; 2 studies, 586 infants; low-certainty evidence). No included studies reported on perineal trauma, postnatal depression, maternal and infant development of diabetes or neurosensory disability. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Low-certainty evidence from six trials has not clearly identified the effect of probiotics on the risk of GDM. However, high-certainty evidence suggests there is an increased risk of pre-eclampsia with probiotic administration. There were no other clear differences between probiotics and placebo among the other primary outcomes. The certainty of evidence for this review's primary outcomes ranged from low to high, with downgrading due to concerns about substantial heterogeneity between studies, wide CIs and low event rates. Given the risk of harm and little observed benefit, we urge caution in using probiotics during pregnancy. The apparent effect of probiotics on pre-eclampsia warrants particular consideration. Eight studies are currently ongoing, and we suggest that these studies take particular care in follow-up and examination of the effect on pre-eclampsia and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. In addition, the underlying potential physiology of the relationship between probiotics and pre-eclampsia risk should be considered.

Feasibility trial of metformin XR in people with pre-diabetes and stroke (MIPPS)-randomised open blinded endpoint controlled trial.

AIMS: Pre-diabetes is a common condition that affects about 16.4% of Australian adults. Hyperglycaemia is a strong risk factor for the development of stroke. Metformin XR is an approved medication to treat type 2 diabetes in Australia but not pre-diabetes. Additionally, whether it is tolerated following a stroke is unclear. In this pilot study, we aimed to assess the feasibility of Metformin XR in people with stroke and pre-diabetes. METHODS: In this PROBE design trial, people who had recent stroke (within 3 months) with pre-diabetes were randomized to either the active arm (n = 13) receiving usual care plus Metformin XR (500 mg daily increased to a total daily dose of 1500 mg) or the control group receiving only usual care (n = 13). At baseline & after four months of intervention, clinical and biomedical characteristics, cardiovascular risk factors and medication data were recorded. At one month and 2.5 months into the study, compliance rateandside effects were determined. RESULTS: This trial showed that it is feasible to recruit, retain and monitor participants. However, the compliance rate was low. Adherence to metformin XR was 52% (IQR:42% to 61%) based on the remaining tablets in the container after 4 months of intervention. None of the reported side effects were deemed to be related to the study treatment and no significant differences were observed between the metformin XR and the control group. CONCLUSION: Treatment with Metformin XR in participants admitted with stroke and with pre-diabetes is feasible and safe. Strategies are needed to improve adherence in future trials.

ADIPS 2020 guideline for pre-existing diabetes and pregnancy.

This is the full version of the Australasian Diabetes in Pregnancy Society (ADIPS) 2020 guideline for pre-existing diabetes and pregnancy. The guideline encompasses the management of women with pre-existing type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes in relation to pregnancy, including preconception, antepartum, intrapartum and postpartum care. The management of women with monogenic diabetes or cystic fibrosis-related diabetes in relation to pregnancy is also discussed.

ADIPS position paper on pre-existing diabetes and pregnancy.

This is an executive summary of the Australasian Diabetes in Pregnancy Society (ADIPS) 2020 guideline for pre-existing diabetes and pregnancy. The summary focuses on the main clinical practice points for the management of women with type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes in relation to pregnancy, including preconception, antepartum, intrapartum and postpartum care. The full guideline is available at https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.13265.

Time to pregnancy after a prepregnancy very-low-energy diet program in women with obesity: substudy of a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of a prepregnancy very-low-energy diet (VLED) program on time to pregnancy in women with obesity. DESIGN: Substudy of a two-arm parallel group randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Multiple tertiary care centers. PATIENT(S): Women 18-38 years old with obesity (body mass index 30-55 kg/m2) and planning conception. INTERVENTION(S): One hundred sixty-four normoglycemic women with body mass index 30-55 kg/m2, aged 18-38 years, and planning pregnancy were recruited through a social media platform for a two-arm randomized controlled trial. Women were allocated to a 12-week standard dietary intervention (SDI) or modified VLED. Completers of the intervention were observed for up to 48 weeks, and time to pregnancy was recorded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The prespecified exploratory outcome for this substudy was time to pregnancy between the completion of the 12-week intervention and the date of conception. RESULT(S): Maternal weight loss at the end of the 12-week intervention was 3.1% in the SDI group and 11.9% in the VLED group. In completers of the 12-week intervention, time to pregnancy was significantly shorter in the women allocated to the VLED group than in the SDI group. Post hoc analysis showed that this difference in time to conception was particularly overt within 90 days of the intervention. CONCLUSION(S): A VLED program that achieves substantial weight loss before conception reduces time to pregnancy compared with an SDI in women with obesity. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12614001160628.

Preconception management of women with obesity: A systematic review.

The prevalence of women of child-bearing age with obesity continues to rise at an alarming rate. This has significant implications for both the short-term and long-term health of mother and offspring. Given the paucity of evidence-based literature in this field, the preconception management of women with obesity is highly variable both between institutions and around the world. This systematic review aims to evaluate studies that inform us about the role of preconception weight loss in the fertility and pregnancy outcomes of women with obesity. Current therapeutic interventions are discussed, with a specific focus on the suitability of weight loss interventions for women with obesity planning pregnancy. There are significant knowledge gaps in the current literature; these are discussed and areas for future research are explored.

Obesity is associated with retinopathy and macrovascular disease in type 1 diabetes.

Excessive body weight is increasingly seen in type 1 diabetes but its impact is debated. To address this uncertainty, we aimed to determine the association between excess body weight and the macro- and microvascular complications of type 1 diabetes. We identified 501 adults with type 1 diabetes attending an Australian hospital clinic and extracted their clinical and biochemical data from our patient management database. In both men and women, obesity (BMI > 30 kg/m(2)) was the predominant risk factor for retinopathy and cardiovascular disease despite similar HbA1c and increased use of cardioprotective drugs compared to non-obese patients. Obesity was associated with albuminuria in women, but not renal impairment or neuropathy in either sex. We conclude that obesity in type 1 diabetes may promote retinopathy and macrovascular disease. Future trials to determine the effect of weight loss on type 1 diabetes in obese people are needed.