Pregnancy planning in women with diabetes mellitus type 2

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The increase in the incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus worldwide and the improvement in the quality of diabetic and obstetric care lead to an increase in the number of pregnant women with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The incidence of obstetric and perinatal adverse outcomes in women with type 2 diabetes mellitus is often higher than in women with type 1 diabetes. In the world literature, there are few works on the effect of pregnancy planning on the course and outcome of pregnancy in women with type 2 diabetes mellitus.
 AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of pregnancy planning in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in improvement of pregnancy and birth outcomes.
 MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retro- and prospectively analyzed the course and outcome of pregnancy in 124 women with type 2 diabetes mellitus, who were observed in the Diabetes Mellitus and Pregnancy Center of the Research Institute of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductology named after D.O. Ott for the period from 2010 to 2019. The study included 34 women with type 2 diabetes mellitus at the stage of pregnancy planning and 90 women during pregnancy. All patients underwent a general clinical examination, carbohydrate metabolism correction, training at the School of Diabetes Mellitus in the principles of rational nutrition, self-control of glycemia and insulin therapy. Diabetes compensation was assessed by the level of glycated hemoglobin, determined using a method certified in accordance with the National Glycogemoglobin Standartization Program and standardized in accordance with the reference values adopted in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial, as well as by the level of glycemia (self-control at least four times a day). We also assessed the severity of vascular complications of type 2 diabetes mellitus before and during pregnancy, and identified and treated comorbidities. To assess the degree of obesity, the criteria of the World Health Organization and the pregravid body mass index calculated by the Quetelet formula were used. The severity of preeclampsia was assessed in accordance with federal clinical guidelines. Ultrasound examination of the fetus with Doppler blood flow in the vessels of the fetoplacental complex was performed using a Voluson E6 ultrasound system (GE Healthcare, USA). For the timely diagnosis of diabetic fetopathy and fetal cardiomyopathy, dynamic fetometry and echocardiography were conducted. In addition, cardiotocography was performed for antenatal assessment of the fetus from the 30th week of pregnancy. After delivery, a neonatologist assessed the condition of the newborn using the Apgar scale at the first and fifth minutes of life, and then the assessment was carried out in the early neonatal period.
 RESULTS: In the group of women who received pregravid training, the course and outcomes of pregnancy were significantly better: the frequency of preeclampsia was lower (14.7%) compared to the group of women with an unplanned pregnancy (40.0%); there was no severe preeclampsia compared to the same women (13.3%). The number of preterm births was significantly lower (14.7%) in the group of women with planned pregnancy compared to the group of women without pregravid preparation (37.8%). In addition, in the group of women planning pregnancy, there were no fetal congenital malformations, neonatal hypoglycemic conditions, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy; in the group of women with an unplanned pregnancy, these parameters being found to amount to 6.7%, 24.4% and 6.7%, respectively. There was no perinatal mortality in the group of women with a planned pregnancy; however, this parameter was shown to be 3.3% in the group of women with an unplanned pregnancy.
 CONCLUSIONS: Pregnancy planning in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus can significantly improve the course of pregnancy and childbirth outcomes.