Search

Objective: To assess whether testing blood glucose four times daily compared with four times every other day would lead to similar birth weights among patients with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM).Methods: This noninferiority randomized controlled trial was conducted at five centers. After receiving a diagnosis of GDM, women tested their blood glucose every day for 7 days. After that period, compliant women without hyperglycemia requiring treatment were randomized to either blood glucose testing four times a day or every other day. Noninferiority would be declared if the mean birth weight in the every-other-day group was no higher than 165 g (5% difference assuming an average birth weight of 3,296 g) compared with the four times a day group. A total sample size of 286 women allowed noninferiority to be tested (one-sided .05 level of significance).Results: From May 2013 to May 2016, of the 293 women with GDM who were randomized, 149 (51%) were tested four times a day and 144 (49%) were tested every other day. Between the two groups, there were no significant differences with regard to need for medical treatment, induction, gestational age at delivery, mode of delivery, rate of preeclampsia, or shoulder dystocia. Birth weight was similar between both groups and the upper bound of the 90% confidence interval (CI) was less than 165 g, establishing noninferiority with a mean difference of -41 g (90% CI -137 to 54 g). Rate of compliance with blood glucose testing was higher in the every-other-day group (89% compared with 92%, P<.01). The differences in rates of macrosomia and birth weight greater than the 95th percentile were not clinically significant. Neonatal outcomes including neonatal hypoglycemia were similar.Conclusion: Among patients with well-controlled GDM, testing blood glucose values every other day did not increase birth weight, although it did increase compliance with testing when compared with women who tested every day.Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01818557. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To compare neonatal growth outcomes determined by birth weight (BW), placental assessment (Plac Assess) and individualized growth assessment (IGA).Methods: This retrospective analysis was carried out in 45 selected pregnancies at risk for fetal growth restriction. Serial fetal biometry was carried out in the 2nd and 3rd trimester. First and second trimester placental biomarkers, 2nd trimester uterine artery (Ut A) velocimetry and postnatal placental pathology were evaluated as indicators of placental insufficiency. At delivery, weight (WT), head circumference (HC) and crown-heel length (CHL) were measured. BWs were categorized as large-for-gestational-age (LGA), appropriate-for-gestational-age (AGA) and small-for-gestational age (SGA) (<10th, 10th-90th and >90th percentiles). In these categories, neonatal growth outcomes were classified as growth restricted (GR), normal (NORMAL) or macrosomic (MACRO) based on BW plus Plac Assess (Ut A velocimetry, biomarkers, pathology) or IGA [growth potential realization index profile (WT, HC and CHL)].Results: There were 6 LGA, 14 AGA and 25 SGA neonates in this sample. All 14 AGA neonates were considered NORMAL by both IGA and BW + Plac Assess. All six LGA neonates were classified as MACRO by BW + Plac Assess but only four by IGA (the remaining two were NORMAL and high NORMAL). The 25 SGA cases could be divided into five subgroups based on IGA and BW + Plac Assess. The largest subgroup (56%) was GR and the next largest (24%) was NORMAL by both classification methods. In the remaining 20%, there was some evidence of GR but IGA and BW + Plac Assess were not in complete agreement.Conclusions: Agreement was good for all three methods in the LGA and AGA groups. The SGA group was heterogeneous but agreement between IGA and BW + Plac Assess was 89%. These results, using more sophisticated growth assessment methods, confirm placental insufficiency as a primary cause of growth restriction. Most normal and GR SGA neonates can be identified with conventional anatomical measurements if IGA is used. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Gastroschisis is a common abdominal wall defect. While most neonates have an excellent prognosis, complications do occur. Several risk factors for adverse neonatal outcomes have been identified, however, the impact of intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) and oligohydramnios on neonatal morbidity and mortality has not been fully elucidated.Methods: In this retrospective cohort study of pregnancies complicated by gastroschisis at two tertiary-care centers during an eight-year period, maternal, fetal and neonatal data were analyzed to estimate the impact of IUGR and oligohydramnios upon neonatal outcomes. Adverse outcomes were defined as five-minute Apgar score <7, umbilical cord pH <7.12, neonatal sepsis, prolonged ventilator support, prolonged total parenteral nutrition, extended NICU stay, death and a composite of the above.Results: Among the 179 cases of gastroschisis, there were no differences in maternal demographics between cases with and without IUGR or oligohydramnios. Fetuses with oligohydramnios demonstrated a trend toward lower birthweight (p = 0.06). Small for gestational age infants showed a trend toward prolonged ventilator support (p = 0.06). Oligohydramnios and IUGR were otherwise not associated with adverse neonatal outcomes.Conclusions: While risk factors for adverse neonatal outcomes have been identified in pregnancies complicated by gastroschisis, IUGR and oligohydramnios do not appear to be among them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Objective: To identify adequate weight gain ranges during pregnancy in Japanese women. Method: Obstetric records from 2001 to 2002 for 46,659 term, singleton, vaginally delivered live births was used to estimate IUGR and macrosomia risk. Total maternal weight gain was grouped according to gestational age-specific percentile values of weight gain as follows: “very low” (under the 25th), “low” (25th to 49th), “moderate” (50th to 74th), “high” (75th to 89th), and “very high” (90th and over). Results: About 6% of infants were identified as having IUGR and 0.9% as macrosomia. IUGR risk was elevated with low weight gains. Macrosomia risk was related to high weight gains and previous spontaneous abortions. Conclusion: Achieving weight gains between the 50th and 75th percentiles for gestational age was considered adequate for optimal fetal growth in Japanese pregnant women. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) adopted more stringent diagnostic criteria for GDM in 2013, to improve pregnancy outcomes. However, there is no global consensus on these new diagnostic criteria, because of limited evidence. The objective of the study was to evaluate maternal characteristics and pregnancy outcomes in two cohorts in the Netherlands applying different diagnostic criteria for GDM i.e. WHO-2013 and WHO-1999.Methods: A multicenter retrospective study involving singleton GDM pregnancies in two regions, between 2011 and 2016. Women were diagnosed according to the WHO-2013 criteria in the Deventer region (WHO-2013-cohort) and according to the WHO-1999 criteria in the Groningen region (WHO-1999-cohort). After GDM diagnosis, all women were treated equally based on the national guideline. Maternal characteristics and pregnancy outcomes were compared between the two groups.Results: In total 1386 women with GDM were included in the study. Women in the WHO-2013-cohort were older and had a higher pre-gestational body mass index. They were diagnosed earlier (24.9 [IQR 23.3-29.0] versus 27.7 [IQR 25.9-30.7] weeks, p = < 0.001) and less women were treated with additional insulin therapy (15.6% versus 43.4%, p = < 0.001). Rate of spontaneous delivery was higher in the WHO-2013-cohort (73.1% versus 67.4%, p = 0.032). The percentage large-for-gestational-age (LGA) neonates (birth weight > 90th percentile, corrected for sex, ethnicity, parity, and gestational age) was lower in the WHO-2013- cohort, but not statistical significant (16.5% versus 18.5%, p = 0.379). There were no differences between the cohorts regarding stillbirth, birth trauma, low Apgar score, and preeclampsia.Conclusions: Using the new WHO-2013 criteria resulted in an earlier GDM diagnosis, less women needed insulin treatment and more spontaneous deliveries occurred when compared to the cohort diagnosed with WHO-1999 criteria. No differences were found in adverse pregnancy outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information on a paper which examines whether large babies can be identified before birth.