Search

BackgroundIn pregnancy, epidemiological data have consistently shown strong associations between sleep quality and duration and maternal glycemia. However, other sleep disturbances such as difficulty falling asleep and staying asleep are common in pregnancy. They may contribute to impaired maternal glycemia through sympathetic nervous system activity, systemic inflammation, and hormonal pathways. However, there is little research examining associations between these specific sleep disturbances and maternal glycemia.ObjectiveThis study aimed to investigate the associations of sleep disturbances during mid-pregnancy and mid-pregnancy maternal glycemia and gestational diabetes subtypes.Study DesignThis is a secondary data analysis of the Comparison of Two Screening Strategies for Gestational Diabetes trial. Participants (n = 828) self-reported the frequency of sleep disturbances (i.e., trouble falling asleep, trouble staying asleep, waking several times per night, and waking feeling tired or worn out) in mid-pregnancy. Gestational diabetes was diagnosed using either the International Associations of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups or Carpenter-Coustan approach. We defined gestational diabetes subtypes based on the degree of insulin resistance and beta-cell dysfunction. We used multinomial logistic regression to examine associations of sleep disturbances with gestational diabetes status (i.e., normal, mild glycemic dysfunction, and gestational diabetes) and gestational diabetes subtypes (i.e., neither insulin resistance or beta-cell dysfunction, insulin resistance only, beta-cell dysfunction only, and insulin resistance and beta- cell dysfunction).ResultsA total of 665 participants (80%) had normal glycemia, 81 (10%) mild hyperglycemia, and 80 (10%) had gestational diabetes. Among participants with gestational diabetes, 62 (78%) had both insulin resistance and beta-cell dysfunction, 15 (19 %) had insulin resistance only, and 3 had beta-cell dysfunction only or neither insulin resistance nor beta-cell dysfunction. Sleep disturbance frequency was not associated with maternal glycemia or gestational diabetes subtypes.ConclusionsSleep disturbances in mid-pregnancy were not associated with maternal glycemia during mid-pregnancy. Future research should collect data on sleep disturbances at multiple time points in pregnancy and in combination with other sleep disturbances to determine whether sleep plays any role in maternal glycemic control.

Background/Objective:Disparities faced by individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D) or gestational diabetes mellitus have been identified. However, because less is known about disparities faced by pregnant women with T2D and since the prevalence of T2D is increasing, we sought to investigate this issue.Methods:We performed a retrospective cohort study that included 369 women with singleton gestation and T2D that delivered from 2018-2020. Using maternal self-reported race and ethnicity abstracted from the electronic medical record, we categorized the women as Non-Hispanic White, Non-Hispanic Black, or Hispanic. Demographics, health care utilization, and maternal and neonatal outcomes were also abstracted. One way ANOVA and chi-squared tests were utilized to compare outcomes among the groups, and logistic regression was used to control for co-variates.Results:Non-Hispanic White and Non-Hispanic Black women had a higher BMI at their first prenatal visit and were more likely to be nulliparous. They were also more likely to have a prior caesarean delivery and chronic hypertension. Non-Hispanic Black women were more likely to have ≥12 prenatal visits compared to Non-Hispanic White and Hispanic women (70 vs. 43 vs. 45%, p

Large for gestational age birth weight is associated with adverse short- and long-term outcomes. Infants born with large for gestational age birth weight are at increased risk for neonatal intensive care unit admission, respiratory distress, neonatal metabolic abnormalities including hypoglycemia, birth trauma, and even stillbirth or neonatal death. The risk for many of these complications increases with higher birth weights. Individuals with large for gestational age birth weight also appear to be at subsequent increased risk for overweight/obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and even some childhood cancers. These data highlight the need for effective interventions to decrease risk across the lifespan.

Background Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with fetal overgrowth, and certain treatments are associated with an increased risk of macrosomia. However, there are limited data about the long-term effect of GDM treatment on childhood growth. Methods Cohort study of 816 women with GDM and their offspring delivered between 2009 and 2012. Childhood height and weight through age 3 were collected from the medical record and z-scores and body mass index (BMI) were calculated. We assessed the association between GDM treatment and childhood growth using linear mixed modeling. Results Treatment was divided into medical nutritional therapy (MNT) (n = 293), glyburide (n = 421), and insulin (n = 102). At delivery, birthweight, z-score, and BMI were higher in the offspring of women treated with either glyburide or insulin compared to MNT. However, weight, z-score, and BMI were similar among all offspring at 6 months and 1, 2, and 3 years of age. After controlling for covariates, there were differences in the weight z-score (P = 0.01) over the 3-year period by treatment group, but no differences in weight (P = 0.06) or change in BMI (P = 0.28). Pairwise comparisons indicated that insulin was associated with more weight gain compared with MNT (0.69 kg; 95% CI, 0.10-1.28; P = 0.02) and glyburide was associated with a trend toward lower weight z-score compared with MNT (−0.24; 95% CI, −0.47 to 0.003; P = 0.05). Conclusion Despite growth differences detected at birth, we observed no meaningful differences in childhood growth from 6 months to 3 years among treatment groups, including in the offspring of women with GDM treated with glyburide.

Objective This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of severe insulin resistance (insulin requirements ≥2 units/kg) at delivery and the relationship between severe insulin resistance, glycemic control, and adverse perinatal outcomes in pregnant women with type-2 diabetes mellitus. Study Design This is a retrospective cohort study of women with type-2 diabetes mellitus who delivered between January 2015 and December 2017 at a tertiary academic medical center. Maternal demographic information, self-monitored blood sugars, and insulin doses were abstracted from the medical record. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify maternal baseline characteristics associated with severe insulin resistance at delivery. Results Overall 72/160 (45%) of women had severe insulin resistance. Women in the severe insulin resistance group demonstrated evidence of suboptimal glycemic control as evidenced by higher mean hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) values (7.2 [ ± 1.1] vs. 6.6 [ ± 1.3%], p = 0.003), higher mean fasting (104.0 [ ± 17.4] vs. 95.2 [ ± 11.7 mg/dL], p Conclusion Severe insulin resistance is common among pregnant women with type-2 diabetes, and it is associated with suboptimal glycemic control. Future studies are necessary to develop strategies to identify women with severe insulin resistance early in pregnancy and facilitate adequate insulin dosing. Key Points

Background Nearly half of all women exceed the 2009 Institute of Medicine guidelines for gestational weight gain. Excess gestational weight gain is associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes. Objective Our objective was to determine whether having a personal gestational weight gain goal consistent with the Institute of Medicine’s recommendations for appropriate gestational weight gain and whether having a discussion with one’s obstetrical provider regarding that goal were associated with appropriate gestational weight gain. Study Design This is a secondary analysis of the Nulliparous Pregnancy Outcomes Study: Monitoring Mothers-To-Be study, a prospective cohort study of nulliparous women. We asked women at their first study visit (between 6 and 13 weeks’ gestation) whether they had a gestational weight gain goal and what that goal was. Furthermore, we asked whether their provider discussed a gestational weight gain goal and what that goal was. We classified personal and provider-recommended gestational weight gain goals as consistent or inconsistent with the Institute of Medicine guidelines, taking into account a woman’s initial body mass index category (underweight, normal weight, overweight, and obese). We included women with live singleton term deliveries (between 37 and 43 weeks’ gestation) in this analysis. We classified the primary outcome, which was gestational weight gain (defined as the difference between first visit weight and final weight before delivery), as inadequate, appropriate, or excessive, based on the Institute of Medicine guidelines and initial body mass index category. We used Student t, Wilcoxon rank-sum, and chi-square tests for bivariable analyses, and multinomial logistic regression was performed to control for confounding variables. Results Of 6727 eligible women, 3799 (56.5% of all eligible women) stated they had a gestational weight gain goal. Of the 3799 women with a stated goal, 2589 (38.5% of all women) had a goal consistent with the Institute of Medicine’s recommendations. In addition, of the 6727 eligible women, 2188 (32.5%) reported that they discussed gestational weight gain with their provider, and 1548 of these (23.0% of all women) recalled that their provider gave a gestational weight gain goal in accordance with the Institute of Medicine guidelines. Although having any gestational weight gain goal was not associated with appropriate gestational weight gain, having a gestational weight gain goal that was consistent with the Institute of Medicine’s recommendations was associated with a reduced risk of excessive (adjusted relative risk ratio, 0.77; 95% confidence interval, 0.64–0.92) and inadequate weight gain (adjusted relative risk ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.53–0.82). Conversely, discussing gestational weight gain goals with a provider was not associated with either inadequate or excessive gestational weight gain even if the provider’s recommendations for gestational weight gain were consistent with the guidelines. Conclusion Nulliparas who delivered singleton pregnancies at term who had a personal gestational weight gain goal consistent with the Institute of Medicine’s recommendations were less likely to have excessive or inadequate gestational weight gain. Further study is required to evaluate the most effective way to communicate this information to patients.

Objective The aim of study is to compare the performance of ultrasonographic customized and population fetal growth standards for prediction adverse perinatal outcomes. Study Design This was a secondary analysis of the Nulliparous Pregnancy Outcomes Study: Monitoring Mothers-to-Be, in which l data were collected at visits throughout pregnancy and after delivery. Percentiles were assigned to estimated fetal weights (EFWs) measured at 22 to 29 weeks using the Hadlock population standard and a customized standard (www.gestation.net). Areas under the curve were compared for the prediction of composite and severe composite perinatal morbidity using EFW percentile. Results Among 8,701 eligible study participants, the population standard diagnosed more fetuses with fetal growth restriction (FGR) than the customized standard (5.5 vs. 3.5%, p The population standard diagnosed FGR among black women and Hispanic women at nearly double the rate it did among white women (p Conclusion At 22 to 29 weeks' gestation, EFW percentile alone poorly predicts perinatal morbidity whether using customized or population fetal growth standards. The population standard diagnoses FGR at increased rates in subgroups not at increased risk of morbidity and at lower rates in subgroups at increased risk of morbidity, whereas the customized standard does not.

Objective We assessed if the initial response to medical nutritional therapy (MNT) can help predict the need for pharmacological therapy in women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Study Design We identified 1,174 women with GDM who underwent standardized dietary counseling and reported glucose values from the first week of MNT. We compared women who required pharmacological therapy with those who did not use bivariate statistics, and used multivariable logistic regression modeling to assess for factors predicting the need for pharmacological therapy. Results We identified 819 women (69.8%) who needed pharmacological therapy. They had higher prepregnancy body mass index, higher rates of GDM diagnosis before 24 weeks, and higher oral glucose tolerance test values. After adjustment for covariates, age (odds ratio [OR]: 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01–1.08), obesity (OR: 2.49; 95% CI: 1.70–3.66), and ≥33% of abnormal glucose values from the first week of MNT (OR: 13.84; 95% CI: 9.4–20.20) were associated with the need for pharmacological therapy. Area under the curve of the regression model was 0.83, with a sensitivity of 72.2%, a specificity of 86.8%, and a positive predictive value of 92.5%. Conclusion Glucose values from the first week of MNT were the strongest predictor of needing pharmacological therapy. Further studies are needed to define metabolic predictors of response to MNT in women with GDM.

Overweight and obese women with gestational diabetes mellitus are at increased risk for adverse perinatal outcomes, and they are also more likely to have suboptimal glycemic control. However, there is a paucity of data evaluating whether lower glycemic targets could improve outcomes.To evaluate the feasibility of intensive glycemic control in overweight and obese women with gestational diabetes mellitus.We randomized 60 overweight or obese women with gestational diabetes mellitus, diagnosed between 12 and 32 weeks' gestation to either intensive (fasting90 mg/dL, 1 hour postprandial120 mg/dL) or standard (fasting95 mg/dL, 1 ho postprandial140 mg/dL) glycemic targets. Maternal glucose was assessed in 2 ways: blinded continuous glucose monitors, worn for 5 days at 2 time points (at 12-32 weeks and again at 32-36 weeks), and self-monitored glucose measurement 4 times per day. All women underwent standardized dietary counseling, and medical therapy was prescribed as needed to achieve glycemic control.Between December 2015 and December 2017, we randomized 60 women to either intensive (n = 30) or standard (n = 30) glycemic control. Baseline characteristics including maternal age, body mass index, and gestational age at diagnosis were similar between the intensive and standard groups. Medical therapy was more common in women in the intensive group than those in the standard group (83 vs 57%, P = .02). Women in the intensive glycemic control group had lower glucose values as assessed by continuous glucose monitors at including 24-hour mean (-8.1; 95% confidence interval, -12.0 to -4.3 mg/dL; P .0001) and 1-h postprandial (-11.8; 95% confidence interval, -19.7 to -3.9 mg/dL, P = .004) values. Hypoglycemia60 mg/dL was uncommon and did not differ between groups.Intensive glycemic targets can be used in overweight and obese women with minimal hypoglycemia, and this approach results in improved glycemic control when compared to standard glycemic targets. Further studies are needed to determine whether intensive glycemic targets can improve maternal and neonatal outcomes in high-risk women with gestational diabetes mellitus.NCT02530866; clinicaltrials.gov.