A prospective population-based multicentre study on the impact of maternal body mass index on adverse pregnancy outcomes: Focus on normal weight.

BACKGROUND: Maternal body mass index (BMI) below or above the reference interval (18.5-24.9 kg/m2) is associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes. Whether BMI exerts an effect within the reference interval is unclear. Therefore, we assessed the association between adverse pregnancy outcomes and BMI, in particular within the reference interval, in a general unselected pregnant population. METHODS: Data was extracted from a prospective population-based multicentre cohort (Risk Estimation for PrEgnancy Complications to provide Tailored care (RESPECT) study) conducted between December 2012 to January 2014. BMI was studied in categories (I: <18.5, II: 18.5-19.9, III: 20.0-22.9, IV: 23.0-24.9, V: 25.0-27.4, VI: 27.5-29.9, VII: >30.0 kg/m2) and as a continuous variable within the reference interval. Adverse pregnancy outcomes were defined as composite endpoints for maternal, neonatal or any pregnancy complication, and for adverse pregnancy outcomes individually. Linear trends were assessed using linear-by-linear association analysis and (adjusted) relative risks by regression analysis. RESULTS: The median BMI of the 3671 included women was 23.2 kg/m2 (IQR 21.1-26.2). Adverse pregnancy outcomes were reported in 1256 (34.2%). Linear associations were observed between BMI categories and all three composite endpoints, and individually for pregnancy-induced hypertension (PIH), preeclampsia, gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), large-for-gestational-age (LGA) neonates; but not for small-for-gestational-age neonates and preterm birth. Within the reference interval, BMI was associated with the composite maternal endpoint, PIH, GDM and LGA, with adjusted relative risks of 1.15 (95%CI 1.06-1.26), 1.12 (95%CI 1.00-1.26), 1.31 (95%CI 1.11-1.55) and 1.09 (95%CI 1.01-1.17). CONCLUSIONS: Graded increase in maternal BMI appears to be an indicator of risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes even among women with a BMI within the reference interval. The extent to which BMI directly contributes to the increased risk in this group should be evaluated in order to determine strategies most valuable for promoting safety and long-term health for mothers and their offspring.

Estimated impact of introduction of new diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Implementation of new diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are still a subject of debate, mostly due to concerns regarding the effects on the number of women diagnosed with GDM and the risk profile of the women newly diagnosed. AIM: To estimate the impact of the World Health Organization (WHO) 2013 criteria compared with the WHO 1999 criteria on the incidence of gestational diabetes mellitus as well as to determine the diagnostic accuracy for detecting adverse pregnancy outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed a single center Dutch cohort of 3338 women undergoing a 75 g oral glucose tolerance test where the WHO 1999 criteria to diagnose GDM were clinically applied. Women were categorized into four groups: non-GDM by both criteria, GDM by WHO 1999 only (excluded from GDM), GDM by WHO 2013 only (newly diagnosed) and GDM by both criteria. We compared maternal characteristics, pregnancy outcomes and likelihood ratios for adverse pregnancy outcomes. RESULTS: Retrospectively applying the WHO 2013 criteria increased the cohort incidence by 13.1%, from 19.3% to 32.4%. Discordant diagnoses occurred in 21.3%; 4.1% would no longer be labelled as GDM, and 17.2% were newly diagnosed. Compared to the non-GDM group, women newly diagnosed were older, had higher rates of obesity, higher diastolic blood pressure and higher rates of caesarean deliveries. Their infants were more often delivered preterm, large-for-gestational-age and were at higher risk of a 5 min Apgar score < 7. Women excluded from GDM were older and had similar pregnancy outcomes compared to the non-GDM group, except for higher rates of shoulder dystocia (4.3% vs 1.3%, P = 0.015). Positive likelihood ratios for adverse outcomes in all groups were generally low, ranging from 0.54 to 2.95. CONCLUSION: Applying the WHO 2013 criteria would result in a substantial increase in GDM diagnoses. Newly diagnosed women are at increased risk for pregnancy adverse outcomes. This risk, however, seems to be lower than those identified by the WHO 1999 criteria. This could potentially influence the treatment effect that can be achieved in this group. Evidence on treatment effects in newly diagnosed women is urgently needed.

SUGAR-DIP trial: oral medication strategy versus insulin for diabetes in pregnancy, study protocol for a multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: In women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) requiring pharmacotherapy, insulin was the established first-line treatment. More recently, oral glucose lowering drugs (OGLDs) have gained popularity as a patient-friendly, less expensive and safe alternative. Monotherapy with metformin or glibenclamide (glyburide) is incorporated in several international guidelines. In women who do not reach sufficient glucose control with OGLD monotherapy, usually insulin is added, either with or without continuation of OGLDs. No reliable data from clinical trials, however, are available on the effectiveness of a treatment strategy using all three agents, metformin, glibenclamide and insulin, in a stepwise approach, compared with insulin-only therapy for improving pregnancy outcomes. In this trial, we aim to assess the clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and patient experience of a stepwise combined OGLD treatment protocol, compared with conventional insulin-based therapy for GDM. METHODS: The SUGAR-DIP trial is an open-label, multicentre randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. Participants are women with GDM who do not reach target glycaemic control with modification of diet, between 16 and 34 weeks of gestation. Participants will be randomised to either treatment with OGLDs, starting with metformin and supplemented as needed with glibenclamide, or randomised to treatment with insulin. In women who do not reach target glycaemic control with combined metformin and glibenclamide, glibenclamide will be substituted with insulin, while continuing metformin. The primary outcome will be the incidence of large-for-gestational-age infants (birth weight >90th percentile). Secondary outcome measures are maternal diabetes-related endpoints, obstetric complications, neonatal complications and cost-effectiveness analysis. Outcomes will be analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Utrecht University Medical Centre. Approval by the boards of management for all participating hospitals will be obtained. Trial results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR6134; Pre-results.

Long-Term Effects of Oral Antidiabetic Drugs During Pregnancy on Offspring: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Follow-up Studies of RCTs.

INTRODUCTION: Antidiabetic drugs (OADs) are increasingly prescribed to treat hyperglycaemia during pregnancy in women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) or polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), even though long-term effects on offspring are unknown. This systematic review summarises the evidence of follow-up studies of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) reporting on long-term effects of prenatal exposure to OADs on offspring. METHODS: The MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL databases were searched from inception to April 2018 for the concepts antidiabetic agents and prenatal exposure (or pregnancy and offspring/child) in combination with an RCT search filter. RCTs evaluating post-neonatal health effects in offspring and comparing maternal treatment with an OAD with no treatment, placebo, an alternative OAD or insulin during pregnancy were eligible for inclusion. Two independent researchers selected, extracted and assessed the data. Meta-analyses were performed using a random effects model and the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool was used for quality assessment. RESULTS: Ten studies were included, with a maximal follow-up duration of 9 years, comprising 778 children of mothers with GDM or PCOS who were randomised to either metformin or insulin/placebo during pregnancy. Meta-analysis showed that children prenatally exposed to metformin were heavier compared to controls (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.26 [95% CI 0.11-0.41]), but not taller (SMD 0.10 [95% CI -0.14-0.33]). Additionally, offspring body mass index (BMI) z scores did not differ according to metformin exposure (mean difference 0.30 [95% CI -0.01-0.61]). Individual small studies reported that prenatal exposure to metformin was associated with greater mid-upper arm, head and waist circumferences, biceps skinfolds, waist-to-height ratio, more arm fat, higher fasting glucose, ferritin and lower LDL cholesterol in offspring. CONCLUSION: Prenatal exposure to metformin is associated with increased offspring weight, but not with height or BMI. Larger follow-up studies are needed to confirm and look into the implications of these findings. Plain language summary available for this article.

Neonatal Hypoglycemia Following Diet-Controlled and Insulin-Treated Gestational Diabetes Mellitus.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the risk of neonatal hypoglycemia following diet-controlled and insulin-treated gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and how it relates to birth weight. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Prospective cohort study included term neonates born after GDM from January 2013 through December 2015 at the University Medical Center Utrecht (Utrecht, the Netherlands). Routine screening of neonatal blood glucose levels was performed at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 h after birth. Main outcome measures were neonatal hypoglycemia defined as blood glucose ≤36 mg/dL (severe) and ≤47 mg/dL (mild). RESULTS: A total of 506 neonates were included, born after pregnancies complicated by GDM treated either with insulin (22.5%) or without insulin (77.5%). The incidence of mild and severe hypoglycemia was similar in the insulin-treated and diet-controlled groups (33 vs. 35%, P = 0.66; and 20 vs. 21%, P = 0.79). A birth weight >90th centile was seen in 17.2% of all infants. Although children with a birth weight >90th centile had the highest risk for hypoglycemia, the vast majority of hypoglycemia (78.6%) was detected in those with a birth weight <90th centile. Over 95% of all hypoglycemia occurred within 12 h after birth. CONCLUSIONS: Routine screening for neonatal hypoglycemia following pregnancies complicated by GDM reveals high incidence of both mild and severe hypoglycemia for both diet-controlled and insulin-treated GDM and across the full range of birth weight centiles. We propose routine blood glucose screening for neonatal hypoglycemia within the first 12 h of life in all neonates after GDM, irrespective of maternal insulin use or birth weight.