Treatment For Mild Gestational Diabetes Research Articles

Reflections on the Multicenter Randomized Trial of Treatment for Mild Gestational Diabetes.

After the 2006 hyperglycemia and adverse pregnancy outcomes study, which confirmed the relationship between maternal glycemia and pregnancy outcomes, the debate remained on whether treatment benefited gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Nonetheless, practitioners continued to universally screen for and treat women identified as GDM. To assess the benefits and harms of screening and treatment of GDM, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal and Fetal Medicine Unit Network designed and conducted a well-designed randomized controlled trial in women with mild GDM. The trial established that treatment of GDM resulted in a significant reduction in several important perinatal and maternal outcomes.

Does treatment of mild gestational diabetes reduce adverse neonatal outcomes?

Log in or Register Subscribe to journalSubscribe Get new issue alertsGet alerts Enter your Email address: Wolters Kluwer Health may email you for journal alerts and information, but is committed to maintaining your privacy and will not share your personal information without your express consent. For more information, please refer to our Privacy Policy. Subscribe to eTOC Secondary Logo Journal Logo All Articles Images Videos Podcasts Blogs Advanced Search Toggle navigation Subscribe Register Login Articles & Issues Current IssuePrevious IssuesOnline First For Authors Information for AuthorsLanguage Editing Services Journal Info About the JournalEditorial BoardAffiliated SocietyAdvertisingSubscription ServicesReprintsOpen AccessRights and Permissions Collections All Articles Images Videos Podcasts Blogs Advanced Search

Investigating the effects of treatment based on single high blood glucose in gestational diabetes screening on maternal and neonatal complications.

To create a positive step toward achieving an efficient method for gestational diabetes treatment, the present study was carried out to compare the treatment outcomes based on single impaired blood glucose versus regular method in health care centers in Iran. This randomized clinical trial was carried out in Tehran/Iran between March 2012 and August 2013. Study sample consisted of mothers whose fasting blood sugar was disturbed or a disturbed blood sugar was seen in OGTT with 75 g glucose load, according to ADA standards. For each outcome, multiple logistic regressions were used to control for the effects of potential confounders. When a confounder was measured on a continuous scale (e.g., age), LOWESS (locally weighted scatter plot smoothing) algorithm was used to determine whether the effect of that variable was linear. We also used the fractional polynomial regression to determine the optimal transformation of continuous covariates. The information of 189 pregnant women was used in this study; 87 in the interventional group (46 %) and 102 in the control group (54 %). Treatment based on the new protocol has very high protective effect (OR 0.25, 95 % CI 0.68-0.88) in terms of neonatal hyperbilirubinemia. This difference was not seen in other outcomes including stillbirth, macrosomic newborn delivery, hypoglycemia, and hypocalcemia. The risk of neonatal hypoglycemia reduced after the 25th week of gestation (OR 0.39, 95 % CI 0.15-0.98). Although the treatment of mild gestational diabetes could not significantly decrease severe neonatal outcomes, it did significantly reduce the risk of hyperbilirubinemia and its subsequent complications.

3: Effect of treatment of mild gestational diabetes on long-term maternal outcomes

3: Effect of treatment of mild gestational diabetes on long-term maternal outcomes

A retrospective multi-institutional study of treatment for mild gestational diabetes in Japan

AimsTo determine whether treating mild gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with improvement of pregnancy outcomes in Japan. MethodsIn a multi-institutional retrospective study, we examined pregnant women meeting the criteria for mild GDM (i.e., only one abnormal value [OAV] for 75-g OGTT; fasting glucose ≥100mg/dL, 1-h postprandial glucose ≥180mg/dL, and 2-h postprandial glucose ≥150mg/dL), receiving either routine prenatal care (non-treatment group) or dietary intervention alone or dietary intervention with self-monitoring of blood glucose and/or insulin therapy, if necessary (treatment group). Pregnancy outcomes were compared between these groups. ResultsData from 893 eligible women were collected from 30 institutions. Participants included 542 untreated and 351 treated women. Although there were no significant differences in baseline clinical characteristics or maternal and perinatal outcomes between these groups, the incidence of large-for-gestational-age (LGA) infants was lower in the treatment group (P=0.07). Multiple logistic regression analysis (MLRA) revealed that pre-pregnancy BMI and gestational weight gain were associated with LGA infants, while 75-g OGTT results were unrelated to LGA. When overweight and obese women were the subjects, the number of LGA infants was significantly lower in the intervention than in the control group, and gestational weight gain was significantly lower in the treatment than in the control group. MLRA showed that intervention was significantly related to a lower incidence of LGA infants. ConclusionsOur study suggests that maternal BMI impacts fetal growth and that treatment for overweight or obese mothers with OAV is associated with a lower frequency of LGA infants.

The Obstetric and Neonatal Implications of a Low Value on the 50-g Glucose Screening Test

To assess the relationship between a low 50-g 1-hour glucose loading test (GLT) and maternal and neonatal outcomes in women without diabetes. This was a secondary analysis of a multicenter observational cohort from a randomized trial of treatment for mild gestational diabetes. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were compared between women with GLT values < 90 mg/dL and those with results 90 to 119 mg/dL. Of 436 enrolled women, 297 (68.1%) had a GLT result of 90 to 119 mg/dL and 139 (31.9%) had a result of < 90 mg/dL. There was a lower incidence of neonatal hypoglycemia in those with a GLT < 90 mg/dL (5.7% versus 16.5%, p = 0.006). Other outcomes were not associated with test results. A GLT result < 90 mg/dL compared with 90 to 119 mg/dL is associated with a lower risk of neonatal hypoglycemia, but no other significant findings.

A Multicenter, Randomized Trial of Treatment for Mild Gestational Diabetes

ABSTRACT Although there is little evidence that the screening, identification, and treatment of mild gestational diabetes during pregnancy is beneficial, a number of professional organizations have recommended screening for this disorder in most pregnant women. The aim of this multicenter randomized trial was to determine whether treatment of women with mild gestational diabetes mellitus reduces perinatal and obstetrical complications. The participants were 958 women between 24 and 31 weeks of gestation who met criteria for mild gestational diabetes mellitus. They were randomly assigned to receive either formal nutritional counseling, diet therapy, and self-monitoring of blood glucose, together with insulin if required (treatment group, n = 485) or usual prenatal care (control group, n = 473). The primary study outcome was a composite outcome that included perinatal mortality (stillbirth or neonatal death) and neonatal complications that have been associated with maternal hyperglycemia: hypoglycemia, hyperbilirubinemia, neonatal hyperinsulinemia, and birth trauma. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups in the frequency of the composite primary perinatal outcomes of mortality and neonatal complications (treatment group: 32.4% and control group: 37.0%, respectively; the relative risk was 0.87, with a 97% confidence interval of 0.72–1.07; P = 0.14). However, compared with usual care, treatment was associated with significant reductions in several prespecified secondary neonatal or maternal outcomes including mean birth weight (3408 vs. 3302 g), neonatal fat mass (464 vs. 427 g), the frequency of large-for-gestational age infants (14.5% vs. 7.1%), birth weight greater than 4000 g (14.3% vs. 5.9%), shoulder dystocia (4.0% vs. 1.5%), and cesarean delivery (33.8% vs. 26.9%) (P < 0.02 for all comparisons). In addition, the frequency of the combined rates of preeclampsia and gestational hypertension was significantly lower in the treatment group (P < 0.01). These findings show that treatment of mild gestational diabetes mellitus is associated with a reduced risk of several secondary complications including fetal overgrowth, shoulder dystocia, cesarean delivery, and hypertensive disorders (preeclampsia and gestational hypertension).

A Multicenter, Randomized Trial of Treatment for Mild Gestational Diabetes

A Multicenter, Randomized Trial of Treatment for Mild Gestational Diabetes

A Multicenter, Randomized Trial of Treatment for Mild Gestational Diabetes

Although there is little evidence that the screening, identification, and treatment of mild gestational diabetes during pregnancy is beneficial, a number of professional organizations have recommended screening for this disorder in most pregnant women. The aim of this multicenter randomized trial was to determine whether treatment of women with mild gestational diabetes mellitus reduces perinatal and obstetrical complications. The participants were 958 women between 24 and 31 weeks of gestation who met criteria for mild gestational diabetes mellitus. They were randomly assigned to receive either formal nutritional counseling, diet therapy, and self-monitoring of blood glucose, together with insulin if required (treatment group, n = 485) or usual prenatal care (control group, n = 473). The primary study outcome was a composite outcome that included perinatal mortality (stillbirth or neonatal death) and neonatal complications that have been associated with maternal hyperglycemia: hypoglycemia, hyperbilirubinemia, neonatal hyperinsulinemia, and birth trauma. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups in the frequency of the composite primary perinatal outcomes of mortality and neonatal complications (treatment group: 32.4% and control group: 37.0%, respectively; the relative risk was 0.87, with a 97% confidence interval of 0.72–1.07; P = 0.14). However, compared with usual care, treatment was associated with significant reductions in several prespecified secondary neonatal or maternal outcomes including mean birth weight (3408 vs. 3302 g), neonatal fat mass (464 vs. 427 g), the frequency of large-for-gestational age infants (14.5% vs. 7.1%), birth weight greater than 4000 g (14.3% vs. 5.9%), shoulder dystocia (4.0% vs. 1.5%), and cesarean delivery (33.8% vs. 26.9%) (P < 0.02 for all comparisons). In addition, the frequency of the combined rates of preeclampsia and gestational hypertension was significantly lower in the treatment group (P < 0.01). These findings show that treatment of mild gestational diabetes mellitus is associated with a reduced risk of several secondary complications including fetal overgrowth, shoulder dystocia, cesarean delivery, and hypertensive disorders (preeclampsia and gestational hypertension).

Treatment of mild gestational diabetes did not prevent neonatal complications but reduced fetal overgrowth

Source Citation Landon MB, Spong CY, Thom E, et al. A multicenter, randomized trial of treatment for mild gestational diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:1339-48. 19797280

A Multicenter, Randomized Trial of Treatment for Mild Gestational Diabetes

A Multicenter, Randomized Trial of Treatment for Mild Gestational Diabetes

A Multicenter, Randomized Trial of Treatment for Mild Gestational Diabetes

A Multicenter, Randomized Trial of Treatment for Mild Gestational Diabetes

A Multicenter, Randomized Trial of Treatment for Mild Gestational Diabetes

It is uncertain whether treatment of mild gestational diabetes mellitus improves pregnancy outcomes. Women who were in the 24th to 31st week of gestation and who met the criteria for mild gestational diabetes mellitus (i.e., an abnormal result on an oral glucose-tolerance test but a fasting glucose level below 95 mg per deciliter [5.3 mmol per liter]) were randomly assigned to usual prenatal care (control group) or dietary intervention, self-monitoring of blood glucose, and insulin therapy, if necessary (treatment group). The primary outcome was a composite of stillbirth or perinatal death and neonatal complications, including hyperbilirubinemia, hypoglycemia, hyperinsulinemia, and birth trauma. A total of 958 women were randomly assigned to a study group--485 to the treatment group and 473 to the control group. We observed no significant difference between groups in the frequency of the composite outcome (32.4% and 37.0% in the treatment and control groups, respectively; P=0.14). There were no perinatal deaths. However, there were significant reductions with treatment as compared with usual care in several prespecified secondary outcomes, including mean birth weight (3302 vs. 3408 g), neonatal fat mass (427 vs. 464 g), the frequency of large-for-gestational-age infants (7.1% vs. 14.5%), birth weight greater than 4000 g (5.9% vs. 14.3%), shoulder dystocia (1.5% vs. 4.0%), and cesarean delivery (26.9% vs. 33.8%). Treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus, as compared with usual care, was also associated with reduced rates of preeclampsia and gestational hypertension (combined rates for the two conditions, 8.6% vs. 13.6%; P=0.01). Although treatment of mild gestational diabetes mellitus did not significantly reduce the frequency of a composite outcome that included stillbirth or perinatal death and several neonatal complications, it did reduce the risks of fetal overgrowth, shoulder dystocia, cesarean delivery, and hypertensive disorders. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00069576.)

Treatment of Mild Gestational Diabetes Shows Modest Benefit

Treatment of Mild Gestational Diabetes Shows Modest Benefit

A Multicenter, Randomized Trial of Treatment for Mild Gestational Diabetes

A Multicenter, Randomized Trial of Treatment for Mild Gestational Diabetes

Screening for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force

In 2003, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force concluded that evidence was insufficient to advise for or against routinely screening all pregnant women for gestational diabetes mellitus. To review evidence about the benefits and harms of screening for gestational diabetes. Databases (MEDLINE, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Health Technology Assessment Database, National Institute for Health and Clinical Effectiveness, and Cochrane Library) were searched for reports published from January 2000 to 15 November 2007 (and from 1966 to 1999 for additional studies on screening at less than 24 weeks' gestation), citations in the 2003 evidence report, and studies identified through consultation of experts and searches of bibliographies. English-language studies that used standard 1- or 2-step testing for gestational diabetes and that evaluated at least 1 of the following outcomes: neonatal mortality; brachial plexus injury; clavicular fracture; admission to a neonatal intensive care unit for hypoglycemia, hyperbilirubinemia, or the respiratory distress syndrome; maternal mortality; and preeclampsia or pregnancy-induced hypertension. 2 reviewers evaluated 1607 abstracts, critically appraised 288 articles, and qualitatively synthesized 13 studies. No randomized, controlled trials that directly evaluated the risks and benefits of gestational diabetes screening were found. One good-quality randomized, controlled trial of treatment of mild gestational diabetes in a screening-detected population supported a reduction in serious neonatal complications and showed that gestational diabetes treatment also reduced the risk for gestational hypertension. Very limited evidence was found to evaluate early screening for gestational diabetes (before 24 weeks' gestation). Limited evidence suggests that serious maternal hypoglycemia is rare with treatment and that overall quality of life is not worse among women receiving gestational diabetes treatment compared with women not receiving treatment. The literature is limited by lack of a consistent standard for screening or diagnosis of gestational diabetes. Limited evidence suggests that gestational diabetes treatment after 24 weeks improves some maternal and neonatal outcomes. Evidence is even more sparse for screening before 24 weeks' gestation.

How should clinicians interpret results reflecting the effect of an intervention on composite end points: should I dump this lump?

In this issue, Evidence-Based Medicine highlights and comments on a landmark randomised trial, the ACHOIS trial.1 In this trial, Crowther and her colleagues enrolled 1000 pregnant women with mild gestational...