Search

Aims: Women with a history of gestational diabetes (GDM) have an increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes (T2DM). We studied the risk for T2DM in women with and without GDM in relation to body mass index (BMI) and examined whether insulin treatment for GDM associates with the risk of developing T2DM. In addition, we investigated whether the risk of developing T2DM after GDM had changed in 15 years. Methods: We used data by linking four registers; Medical Birth Register, Hospital Discharge Register and Primary Care Register run by THL Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare, and Medical Reimbursement Statistics run by the Social Insurance Institution of Finland (Kela). Registry data were collected from 2005 to 2020. The follow-up started from woman’s delivery in 2006–2020 and ended to the diagnosis of T2DM or December 2020. Cox proportional hazard modelling was used to estimate the effect of GDM exposure to T2DM. To assess whether the risk of developing T2DM after GDM had changed in 15 years, we compared the HR between years 2006–2008 and 2018–2020. Results: In total, 462 401 women were included in the study: 96 353 (21%) women had previous GDM. There were 5370 (1.2%) women who developed T2DM after childbirth during the follow-up. Among women with prior GDM, 3995 (4.1%) developed T2DM, while 1375 (0.4%) women without prior GDM developed T2DM during follow-up. The mean follow-up was 6.86 years (SD 4.21) for women with GDM and 9.07 years (SD 4.35) for women without GDM. The hazard ratio (HR) for developing T2DM after GDM was 18.49 (95% CI 17.39–19.67). The incidence of T2DM in women with a history of GDM began to rise almost steadily from the first year of follow-up. As BMI increased, T2DM incidence increased in both women with and without prior GDM but more in women with prior GDM. Insulin treatment had an independent association with increased risk of T2DM (HR 3.81, 95% CI 3.57–4.07). We did not observe any difference in HR between years 2006–2008 and 2

Introduction: Our objective was to compare the efficacy of a 200‐μg misoprostol vaginal insert vs oral misoprostol regarding the cesarean section rate and the time interval to vaginal delivery in nulliparous women with unfavorable cervix. Material and methods: In this prospective multicenter trial, 283 nulliparous women at term with Bishop score <6 were randomized to induction of labor with either a misoprostol vaginal insert (n = 140) or oral misoprostol (n = 143). In the oral misoprostol group, a 50‐μg dose of oral misoprostol was administered every 4 hours up to three times during the first day; during the second day, the dose was increased to 100‐μg every 4 hours up to three times during the first day, if necessary. Primary outcome was the cesarean section rate. Secondary outcomes were the time from induction of labor to vaginal delivery, the rate of other induction methods needed, labor augmentation with oxytocin and/or amniotomy, use of tocolytics and adverse neonatal and maternal events. Results: In the misoprostol vaginal insert group, median time to vaginal delivery was shorter (24.5 hours vs 44.2 hours, P < 0.001), whereas no difference was found in the cesarean section rate (33.8% vs 29.6%, odds ratio [OR] 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66–1.91, P = 0.67). Other induction methods and labor augmentation with oxytocin and/or amniotomy were less frequent in the misoprostol vaginal insert group (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.18–0.59 and OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.32–0.99, respectively). Need for tocolysis and meconium‐stained amniotic fluid were more common in the misoprostol vaginal insert group (OR 3.63, 95% CI 1.12–11.79 and OR 2.38, 95% CI 1.32–4.29, respectively). Maternal and neonatal adverse events did not differ between groups. Conclusions: Misoprostol vaginal insert proved to shorten the time to vaginal delivery and to reduce the use of other methods of labor induction and augmentation, but it did not reduce the cesarean section rate compared with or