Indications for the Postpartum Oral Glucose Tolerance Test­Data From the GestDiab Registry.

BACKGROUND: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) affects more than 50 000 pregnant women in Germany every year. In postpartum diabetes screening, a 75 g oral glucose tolerance test (OGT) is recommended. This is time-consuming and can have side effects, and only 40% of mothers take it. The determination of pre-test probabilities might obviate the need for OGT except in women who are at particular risk. METHODS: We analyzed 5444 cases of GDM from the GestDiab registry over the period 2015-2019. The pretest probabilities of a postpartum diagnosis of diabetes mellitus (DM) or prediabetes were calculated on the basis of clinical variables including postpartum venous fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c). RESULTS: In 0.77% of mothers with a history of GDM in whom DM was not detected by FPG or HbA1c, postpartum DM was diagnosed on the basis of the 2-hour value in the OGT. Individual estimation of the pre-test probability of a diagnosis by OGT of postpartum DM or prediabetes was possible with the aid of the FPG and HbA1c values and clinical predictors including insulin treatment during pregnancy, obesity, GDM diagnosed before 24 weeks of gestation, age over 35, and a 1-hour value in the diagnostic OGT during pregnancy of 180 mg/dL (10.0 mmol/L) or above. The pretest probability of postpartum DM in the study group ranged from 0.11% to 4.17%, and that of postpartum prediabetes from 6.4% to 16.3%. CONCLUSION: The probability of a diagnosis of postpartum diabetes by OGT after GDM can be estimated in postpartum screening on the basis of various parameters. This enables risk-adapted counseling of the affected women along with a long-term strategy for diabetes prevention and follow-up. The findings of our study should be verified by further research.

Adverse perinatal outcomes in gestational diabetes mellitus with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy: results from two nationwide registries in Germany.

INTRODUCTION: Pregnancy is a known independent risk factor for a severe course of COVID-19. The relationship of SARS-CoV-2 infection and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) on neonatal outcomes is unclear. Our aim was to determine if SARS-CoV-2 infection represents an independent risk factor for adverse perinatal outcomes in pregnancy with GDM. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We compared data from two German registries including pregnant women with GDM, established during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (COVID-19-Related Obstetric and Neonatal Outcome Study (CRONOS), a multicenter prospective observational study) and already existing before the pandemic (German registry of pregnant women with GDM; GestDiab). In total, 409 participants with GDM and SARS-CoV-2 infection and 4598 participants with GDM, registered 2018-2019, were eligible for analyses. The primary fetal and neonatal outcomes were defined as: (1) combined: admission to neonatal intensive care unit, stillbirth, and/or neonatal death, and (2) preterm birth before 37+0 weeks of gestation. Large and small for gestational age, maternal insulin therapy, birth weight >4500 g and cesarean delivery were considered as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Women with SARS-CoV-2 infection were younger (32 vs 33 years) and had a higher median body mass index (28 vs 27 kg/m²). In CRONOS, more neonates developed the primary outcome (adjusted OR (aOR) 1.48, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.97) and were born preterm (aOR 1.50, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.10). Fasting glucose was higher in women in CRONOS versus GestDiab (5.4 vs 5.3 mmol/L) considering each 0.1 mmol/L increase was independently associated with a 5% higher risk of preterm birth among women in CRONOS only (aOR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.09). CONCLUSIONS: GDM with SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy is associated with an increased risk of adverse fetal and neonatal outcomes as compared with GDM without SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Gestational diabetes in Germany-prevalence, trend during the past decade and utilization of follow-up care: an observational study.

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is one of the most common medical complications in pregnancy. Information on key figures such as screening rates, prevalence of GDM or utilization of follow-up care and associated factors varies widely and is often lacking. The aim of our study is to provide information on screening rates for and prevalence of GDM as well as utilization of follow-up care in Germany. We used data (2010-2020) from a large, nationwide statutory health insurance containing information on inpatient and outpatient care, including diagnoses, medication and treatments. Descriptive analyses were performed to assess screening rates, prevalence of GDM and participation rates in follow-up care. A log-binomial regression model was calculated to analyze associated factors. Screening rates among pregnant women increased from 40.2% (2010) to 93.3% (2020) and prevalence from 9.4% (2010) to 15.1% (2020). The proportion of women attending follow-up care remained stable over time (around 42%). Age, educational level, insulin prescription, hypertension and obesity were positively associated with participation in follow-up care. Although over 90% of women in Germany are screened for GDM during pregnancy, follow-up care is used much less. Further research is needed to understand the trends in GDM healthcare (from screening to follow-up care) and the reasons for women's (non-)participation, as well as the attitudes and routines of the healthcare providers involved.

Pregnancy Complications in Women With Pregestational and Gestational Diabetes Mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a major risk factor for complications of pregnancy. Based on information for all inpatient births in Germany, we assessed the risks for selected pregnancy complications in women with pregestational diabetes mellitus (preDM) or gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). METHODS: The underlying data comprised all singleton births contained in the inpatient perinatal medicine quality assurance statistics for the years 2013-2019. The frequencies of premature birth, elevated birth weight (large for gestational age, LGA), cesarean section, transfer of the newborn to the perinatal unit, and stillbirth were stratified by maternal age and diabetes status (preDM, GDM, no DM). Poisson regression was used to calculate the relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for the whole period and for each individual year in women with preDM or GDM relative to women without DM. RESULTS: Among the 4 991 275 singleton births included, GDM was documented in 283 210 (5.7%) and preDM in 46 605 (0.93%) cases. GDM was associated with higher RR for premature birth (1.13 [1.12; 1.15]), LGA (1.57 [1.55; 1.58]), cesarean section (1.26 [1.25; 1.27]), and transfer of the newborn (1.54 [1.52; 1.55]). These associations were even stronger in women with preDM: premature birth (2.13 [2.08; 2.18]), LGA (2.72 [2.67; 2.77]), cesarean section (1.62 [1.60; 1.64]), transfer of the newborn (2.61 [2.56; 2.66]). PreDM increased the risk of stillbirth (RR: 2.34 [2.11; 2.59]); GDM was associated with a lower risk (RR: 0.67 [0.62; 0.72]). For women with preDM, the risk of pregnancy complications increased over the study period. CONCLUSION: GDM and preDM are still associated with elevated risks of pregnancy complications. In the case of preDM, the risks may be attributable to the fact that the hyperglycemia is more severe and is already present before conception. Continuous monitoring should include risk factors in pregnant women and care-relevant aspects.

Postpartum screening of women with GDM in specialised practices: Data from 12,991 women in the GestDiab register.

BACKGROUND: Gestational diabetes (GDM) in the short term is associated with various complications during pregnancy; however, in the long run, women have an increased risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Therefore, short- and long-term follow-up postpartum is recommended. METHODS: We assessed the proportion of postpartum diabetes screening among 12,991 women with their first GDM-diagnosed pregnancy in the study period in the nationwide German GestDiab register between 2015 and 2017. In addition to assessing prevalence, we assessed if the probability of postpartum screening was associated with maternal characteristics or pregnancy outcomes. RESULTS: In total, 38.2% (95% CI 32.8%-43.7%) of our sample underwent postpartum diabetes screening, irrespective of its timing. Around 50% of women (19.3% of the total sample) undertook the screening in the recommended time frame of 6-12 weeks postpartum. We found that age, native language, pre-pregnancy BMI, smoking status, number of previous pregnancies, fasting plasma glucose and HbA1c levels as well as previous pregnancies with GDM and treatment with insulin were associated with participation in the postpartum diabetes screening in our sample. CONCLUSION: In our study, more than 60% of the women with GDM did not participate in postpartum diabetes screening. This is a missed opportunity in a high-risk population to detect glucose intolerance. Consequently, appropriate interventions to prevent the progression to T2DM cannot be initiated. Further research should investigate barriers and enabling factors and allow developing a multilevel approach for GDM postpartum care.

Study protocol for a mixed methods exploratory investigation of aftercare services for gestational diabetes in women to develop a new patient-centred model in Germany: the GestDiNa_basic study.

INTRODUCTION: Women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) have a higher risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus compared with women who never had GDM. Consequently, the question of structured aftercare for GDM has emerged. In all probability, many women do not receive care according to the guidelines. In particular, the process and interaction between obstetrical, diabetic, gynaecological, paediatric and general practitioner care lacks clear definitions. Thus, our first goal is to analyse the current aftercare situation for women with GDM in Germany, for example, the participation rate in aftercare diabetes screening, as well as reasons and attitudes stated by healthcare providers to offer these services and by patients to participate (or not). Second, we want to develop an appropriate, effective and patient-centred care model. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a population-based mixed methods study using both quantitative and qualitative research approaches. In various working packages, we evaluate data of the GestDiab register, of the Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians of North Rhine and the participating insurance companies (AOK Rheinland/Hamburg, BARMER, DAK Gesundheit, IKK classic, pronova BKK). In addition, quantitative (postal surveys) and qualitative (interviews) surveys will be conducted with randomly selected healthcare providers (diabetologists, gynaecologists, paediatricians and midwives) and affected women, to be subsequently analysed. All results will then be jointly examined and evaluated. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the ethics committee of the Faculty of Medicine, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf (Ethics Committee No.: 2019-738). Participants of the postal surveys and interviews will be informed in detail about the study and the use of data as well as the underlying data protection regulations before voluntarily participating. The study results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, conferences and public information. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00020283.