Identifying gestational diabetes mellitus and assessing risk factors in affected women: a comprehensive study.

OBJECTIVE: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a prevalent pregnancy complication associated with adverse health outcomes for both mothers and offspring. This study aimed to identify risk factors for GDM, a condition with a rapidly increasing global prevalence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a study involving 474 pregnant women who attended the obstetrics outpatient clinic of Kafkas University Faculty of Medicine Hospital between January 2022 and June 2023. Risk factors for GDM were assessed based on criteria recommended by the American Diabetes Association and the Committee on Practice of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Statistical analyses, including descriptive statistics, Chi-square tests, Mann-Whitney U tests, and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Individuals with GDM (mean age: 31.26±6.09 years) were significantly older than those without GDM (mean age: 28.36±4.89 years; p<0.001). Obesity prevalence was higher in the GDM group (32.5%) compared to the non-GDM group (14.3%; p<0.001). Individuals with GDM had higher rates of pre-diabetes (3.3% vs. 0.3%; p=0.007), a history of gestational diabetes (25.2% vs. 5.7%; p<0.001), high blood sugar in previous pregnancies (13.8% vs. 1.4%; p<0.001), and diabetes mellitus in 1st-degree relatives (40.7% vs. 20.3%; p<0.001). GDM was associated with increased pregnancies (p<0.001), preterm births (p<0.001), macrosomic babies (p=0.026), congenital anomalies (p=0.011), high cholesterol (p=0.036), and polyhydramnios (p=0.001) in previous pregnancies, as well as polyhydramnios in the index pregnancy (p=0.008). Regular exercise in previous pregnancies differed significantly based on GDM presence (p=0.037). CONCLUSIONS: Recognizing modifiable risk factors is crucial for preventing GDM and reducing associated health risks. Healthcare providers should be vigilant, especially among those with a family history of GDM, previous GDM, advanced maternal age, and other risk factors. Early lifestyle interventions show promise. Further research is needed for accurate GDM prediction.

Evaluation and perspectives on hysterosalpingography (HSG) procedure in infertility: a comprehensive study.

OBJECTIVE: Infertility continues to be a common medical problem with significant societal repercussions and psychological and economic effects on families' lives. Hysterosalpingography (HSG) is the preferred method in clinical practice for evaluating the uterine cavity and tubal patency. Our study aims to present a comprehensive perspective on the importance of the HSG procedure in the evaluation of infertile patients, starting with the recommendation of the HSG procedure to the patient, the application of the procedure, and the evaluation of the patient's post-procedure process. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a prospective evaluation of 323 women who underwent HSG at Kafkas University between 2021-2022. The type and duration of infertility in patients, the source from which the patient received the recommendation for HSG, visual pain score for evaluating pain during the HSG procedure, HSG results, patients' perspectives on the procedure's contribution to the treatment processes, their immediate post-procedure pain, and their pregnancy status within 6 months after the procedure were evaluated. RESULTS: 72.1% of patients had primary, and 27.8% had secondary infertility. 82% of HSG results were reported as normal. Among primary infertility, uterine pathologies were detected in 62.5%. In secondary infertile patients, tubal pathology was detected in 88.4%. There is a statistically significant difference between the infertility types of patients with normal HSG results and those without (p=0.001). There was also a difference between the results of HSG and follow-up types (p<0.001). A statistical difference was also found between the HSG result and the patients' conception status within 6 months after the procedure (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: When it comes to the cost of the HSG procedure for infertility, as well as potential pain, radiation exposure, and rare allergic reactions to the contrast material, it is important to choose the appropriate circumstances for this procedure. In order to avoid unnecessary interventional procedures, it would be beneficial to discuss the recommendation of HSG for primary infertile patients under 28.5 years of age. Further research is required in this regard. Since tubal factors are most common among secondary infertile women, this group of patients is more likely to benefit from HSG in the evaluation.