Search

Objective: To study the incidence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in Mexican women with a history of infertility and polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) compared with women without PCOS matched by age, pregestational body mass index (BMI), and parity. Design: Historic cohort study. Setting: Level three medical institution. Patient(s): Group 1 (n = 52), women with a history of infertility and PCOS, and group 2 (n = 52), women without PCOS. Inclusion criteria were singleton pregnancy with ≤13 weeks of gestation. Exclusion criteria were pregestational diabetes mellitus and/or concomitant diseases. Intervention(s): Diagnosis of GDM was based on a 3-hour, 100-g oral glucose tolerance test (GTT) performed during the second trimester. Main Outcome Measure(s): Incidence and relative risk (RR) for GDM. Result(s): The incidence of GDM was 26.9% and 9.6% for groups 1 and 2, respectively (RR = 2.8; 95% confidence interval 1.08–7.2). No other between-group differences were observed in the incidence of miscarriage, preterm birth, premature rupture of membranes, preeclampsia, stillbirth, fetal malformations, or small or large for gestational age newborns. Conclusion(s): Pregnant Mexican women with a history of infertility and PCOS are at increased risk for developing GDM. This risk should be considered beginning early in the second trimester for a timely intervention and to improve the maternal–fetal prognosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim Materials and Methods Results Conclusion Gestational diabetes (GD) is a global health concern with significant implications for maternal and neonatal outcomes. This study investigates the association between early GD (eGD) diagnosis (<24 weeks), pharmacotherapy requirements and adverse neonatal outcomes.A cohort of 369 pregnant women underwent a 75‐g oral glucose tolerance test. Maternal variables, pharmacotherapy prescriptions and neonatal outcomes were analysed employing t‐tests, χ2 tests, and logistic regression. A p < .05 was considered significant.Early GD increased the odds of neonatal hypoglycaemia [odds ratio (OR): 18.57, p = .013] and respiratory distress syndrome (OR: 4.75, p = .034). Nutritional therapy prescription by an accredited nutritionist was the most common treatment in women diagnosed after 24 weeks, but those with eGD required more frequently specialized nutritional consulting + metformin to achieve glycaemic control (p = .027). eGD was associated with a higher requirement of nutritional therapy prescription + metformin (OR: 2.26, 95% confidence interval: 1.25‐4.09, p = .007) and with maternal hyperglycaemia during the post‐partum period at 2 h of the oral glucose tolerance test (OR: 1.03, 95% confidence interval: 1.02‐1.13, p = .024).Timely diagnosis and personalized treatment of GD are desirable because an earlier presentation is related to a higher risk of adverse neonatal and maternal outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Antepartum fetal surveillance (AFS) is essential for pregnant women with diabetes to mitigate the risk of stillbirth. However, there is still no universal consensus on the optimal testing method, testing frequency, and delivery timing. This review aims to comprehensively analyze the evidence concerning AFS and the most advantageous timing for delivery in both gestational and pregestational diabetes mellitus cases. This review's methodology involved an extensive literature search encompassing international diabetes guidelines and scientific databases, including PubMed, MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and Scopus. The review process meticulously identified and utilized pertinent articles for analysis. Within the scope of this review, a thorough examination revealed five prominent international guidelines predominantly addressing gestational diabetes. These guidelines discuss the utility and timing of fetal well-being assessments and recommendations for optimal pregnancy resolution timing. However, the scarcity of clinical trials directly focused on this subject led to a reliance on observational studies as the basis for most recommendations. Glucose control, maternal comorbidities, and the medical management received are crucial in making decisions regarding AFS and determining the appropriate delivery timing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

[Display omitted] • GDM increases infant fat mass accretion (1–6 months) despite excessive fetal growth. • SGA newborns have increased fat mass accretion from 1 to 3 and 1 to 6 months of age. • GDM treatment goals should consider factors affecting fetal growth restriction. To evaluate the association between maternal obesity, gestational diabetes (GDM), and birth size with infant fat-mass (FM) accretion from 1 to 6 months (M). Healthy pregnant women and their term babies from the OBESO cohort were studied (1 M−3 M, n = 122; 1 M−6 M, n = 90). Registered maternal data was: pregestational body-mass-index (preBMI), GDM (2hOGTT), medications, gestational weight gain. Macrosomia (>4000 g), large/small for gestational age (LGA/SGA)(weight/age > 90° and < 90°, respectively-WHO) were recorded at birth. Infant FM (air-displacement plethysmography) was measured (1 M, 3 M, 6 M) and FM accretion computed (ΔkgFM from 1 M−3 M and 1 M−6 M). Exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) was assessed. Adjusted-multiple linear regression models were performed. PreBMI was 27.4 ± 5.2 kg/m2. GDM was present in 9%(n = 11) of women; 12.3%(n = 15) of them received metformin/insulin. One newborn was LGA; 20.7%(n = 25) were SGA. From 1 M−3 M, SGA was a predictor of higher FM accretion (B:0.28, 95%CI:0.14–0.43); GDM was not associated. From 1 M−6 M, higher FM accretion was observed in SGA newborns (B:0.43, 95%CI:0.19–0.67) and GDM infants (B:0.48, 95%CI:0.06–0.89). In all models (R2 ≥ 0.48, p < 0.001), infant weight and being female were positively associated, while maternal obesity, metformin/insulin, and EBF were not. GDM appears to program early higher adiposity accretion, independently of excessive fetal growth. SGA was associated with higher FM accretion in early infancy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To estimate the annual burden of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in Mexico.Methods: A model was built to conduct estimates from a healthcare system perspective, namely, the incremental costs of GDM pregnancy compared with non-GDM pregnancy from the first trimester until childbirth. The model used probabilities from the literature and surveys, and costs obtained from the Ministry of Health and national healthcare institutions. Scenario analyses were performed to estimate the GDM burden at different levels of incidence.Results: Although a non-GDM pregnancy cost on average USD 1880.6 (low risk was USD 1043.9 and high risk was USD 1673.5), a pregnancy with GDM cost USD 2934.9. Therefore, the total additional cost was USD 1576.2 per case. Given the considerable variability of the GDM incidence in Mexico, the total burden could range from USD 86.8 to USD 827.4 million per year.Conclusions: GDM is one of the most frequent complications of pregnancy, but research has been insufficient regarding its epidemiological and economic burden in Latin America. This paper shows that the GDM economic burden in Mexico is substantial despite only accounting for short-term medical costs. Further research to assess the GDM incidence and evaluate its long-term consequences from a broader societal perspective in Mexico is recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The reference intervals for hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in pregnant Mexican women without diabetes are not well defined. The study aims to determine the reference intervals for HbA1c at each trimester in healthy Mexican pregnant women.Methods: This cross-sectional study included healthy Mexican pregnant women in trimester 1 (T1), 6-13.6 weeks of gestation (WG), trimester 2 (T2), 14-27 WG, and trimester 3 (T3), ≥27-36 WG, with a maternal age > 18 years, and pregestational body mass index (BMI) ranging between 18.5-24.9 kg/m2. Women with gestational diabetes mellitus, pregestational diabetes, anemia, a pregestational BMI < 18.5 or ≥ 25 kg/m2, and any hematologic, hepatic, immunological, renal, or cardiac disease were excluded. HbA1c was measured using high-performance liquid chromatography based on the National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program-certified PDQ Primus guidelines. The HbA1c reference intervals were calculated in terms of the 2.5th to the 97.5th percentiles.Results: We analyzed the HbA1c values of 725 women (T1 n = 84, T2 n = 448, and T3 n = 193). The characteristics of the participants were expressed as mean ± standard deviation and included: maternal age (28.2 ± 6.7 years), pregestational weight (54.8 ± 5.9 Kg), pregestational BMI (22.2 ± 1.7 Kg/m2), and glucose values using a 75 g-2 h oral glucose tolerance test; fasting 4.5 ± 0.3 mmol/L (81.5 ± 5.5 mg/dL), 1 h 6.4 ± 1.5 mmol/L (115.3 ± 26.6 mg/dL), and 2 h 5.7 ± 1.1 mmol/L (103.5 ± 19.6 mg/dL). Reference intervals for HbA1c, expressed as median and 2.5th to 97.5th percentile for each trimester were: T1: 5.1 (4.5-5.6%), T2: 5.0 (4.4-5.5%), and T3: 5.1 (4.5-5.6%).Conclusions: The reference range of HbA1C in healthy Mexican pregnant women during pregnancy was 4.4% to 5.6%. We suggest as upper limits of HbA1c value ≤5.6%, 5.5%, and 5.7% for T1, T2, and T3, respectively among Mexican pregnant women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]