Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Association Between Gestational Diabetes Mellitus and Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies With a Quantitative Bias Analysis of Uncontrolled Confounding.
Liu, Xinyue; Nianogo, Roch A; Janzen, Carla; Fei, Zhe; Seamans, Marissa J; Wen, Renee; Li, Xiang; Chen, Liwei.
Affiliation
  • Liu X; Department of Epidemiology, Fielding School of Public Health (X. Liu, R.A.N., M.J.S., X. Li, L.C.), University of California, Los Angeles.
  • Nianogo RA; Department of Epidemiology, Fielding School of Public Health (X. Liu, R.A.N., M.J.S., X. Li, L.C.), University of California, Los Angeles.
  • Janzen C; California Center for Population Research (R.N.), University of California, Los Angeles.
  • Fei Z; Department Obstetrics and Gynecology, David Geffen School of Medicine (C.J.), University of California, Los Angeles.
  • Seamans MJ; Department of Statistics, University of California, Riverside (Z.F.).
  • Wen R; Department of Epidemiology, Fielding School of Public Health (X. Liu, R.A.N., M.J.S., X. Li, L.C.), University of California, Los Angeles.
  • Li X; Department of Biology (R.W.), University of California, Los Angeles.
  • Chen L; Department of Epidemiology, Fielding School of Public Health (X. Liu, R.A.N., M.J.S., X. Li, L.C.), University of California, Los Angeles.
Hypertension ; 81(6): 1257-1268, 2024 Jun.
Article de En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38501243
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Whether individuals with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) had an increased risk of hypertension remains unclear. We conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analysis to examine the association between GDM and hypertension and performed a quantitative bias analysis to quantify the impact of uncontrolled confounding due to antenatal psychological stress.

METHODS:

We searched databases (PUBMED, EMBASE, and Web of Science) through 2022/11. Eligible studies were cohort studies that reported the association of GDM with hypertension. We assessed the risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies. We pooled adjusted risk ratios with 95% CIs using a random effects model. We performed the quantitative bias analysis using the bias formula.

RESULTS:

We included 15 cohort studies, with a total of 3 959 520 (GDM, 175 378; non-GDM, 3 784 142) individuals. During the follow-up of 2 to 20 years, 106 560 cases of hypertension were reported. We found that GDM was associated with a higher risk of hypertension (pooled risk ratio, 1.78 [95% CI, 1.47, 2.17]). The risk ratio was lower among cohorts assessing incident (1.58 [95% CI, 1.29, 1.95]) than prevalent hypertension (2.60 [95% CI, 2.40, 2.83]). However, other subgroup analyses showed no differences. The quantitative bias analysis revealed that if the uncontrolled confounder of antenatal psychological stress was additionally adjusted, the positive association between GDM and hypertension would attenuate slightly (≤18%) but remains positive.

CONCLUSIONS:

Limitations of this study included residual confounding and discrepancies in GDM and hypertension ascertainments. Our findings indicate that GDM is positively associated with hypertension after the index pregnancy.
Sujet(s)
Mots clés

Texte intégral: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Base de données: MEDLINE Sujet principal: Diabète gestationnel / Hypertension artérielle Limites: Female / Humans / Pregnancy Langue: En Journal: Hypertension Année: 2024 Type de document: Article Pays de publication: États-Unis d'Amérique

Texte intégral: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Base de données: MEDLINE Sujet principal: Diabète gestationnel / Hypertension artérielle Limites: Female / Humans / Pregnancy Langue: En Journal: Hypertension Année: 2024 Type de document: Article Pays de publication: États-Unis d'Amérique