Literature DB >> 12591779

An observational study comparing 2-hour 75-g oral glucose tolerance with fasting plasma glucose in pregnant women: both poorly predictive of birth weight.

Christian Ouzilleau1, Marie-Andrée Roy, Louiselle Leblanc, André Carpentier, Pierre Maheux.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The definition and treatment of glucose intolerance during pregnancy are matters of intense controversy. Our goal was to examine the value of the 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in terms of its ability to predict birth weight percentile in a group of women with singleton pregnancies who received minimal treatment for their glucose intolerance.
METHODS: We reviewed the results of OGTTs performed between 24 and 28 weeks' gestation in a group of 300 consecutive high-risk women (mean age 29.5 years [95% confidence interval, CI, 28.9-30.1]; parity 1.5 [95% CI 1.4-1.7]) whose plasma glucose level 1 hour after a randomly administered 50-g glucose load was 8.0 mmol/L or above. These data were compared with results for a randomly selected control group of 300 women whose plasma glucose level 1 hour after a 50-g glucose load was less than 8.0 mmol/L (mean age 28.0 years [95% CI 27.4-28.6]; parity 1.5 [95% CI 1.3-1.6]).
RESULTS: For 76 (25.3%) of the 300 high-risk women, the plasma glucose level 2 hours after a 75-g glucose load (confirmatory OGTT) was 7.8 mmol/L or more, but only 6 of these were treated with insulin, which emphasizes the low level of intervention in this group. Thirty (10.0%) of the neonates in this group were large for gestational age (LGA; adjusted weight at or above the 90th percentile). This proportion did not significantly differ from the proportion for the control group (25 or 8.3%). After exclusion of the 6 insulin-treated women, simple correlations between birth weight percentile and fasting or 2-hour plasma glucose levels were very weak (r = 0.23 and 0.16 respectively; p < 0.01). The correlation between birth weight percentile and fasting or 2-hour plasma glucose persisted in a multiple regression analysis that included the following maternal variables: age, prepregnancy weight, weight gain during pregnancy, parity and smoking. In the multivariate models, the standardized coefficients for fasting and 2-hour plasma glucose levels were low (r = 0.19 [p < 0.001] and r = 0.13 [p = 0.02] respectively). These multivariate models could not explain more than 22% of the total variability in birth weight percentile.
INTERPRETATION: In this population of pregnant, untreated diabetic women, plasma glucose levels (either fasting or after various glucose loads) were independently but poorly correlated with birth weight; no more than 3% to 5% of birth weight variability could be explained by changes in glucose tolerance. Fasting plasma glucose was consistently but marginally better than the plasma glucose level 2 hours after 75-g glucose load for predicting LGA neonates. We conclude that neonatal macrosomia is influenced by variables that are largely independent of plasma glucose concentrations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12591779      PMCID: PMC143544     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  CMAJ        ISSN: 0820-3946            Impact factor:   8.262


  32 in total

1.  Pregnancy outcomes in women without gestational diabetes mellitus related to the maternal glucose level. Is there a continuum of risk?

Authors:  R G Moses; D Calvert
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 19.112

2.  Variability in diagnostic evaluation and criteria for gestational diabetes.

Authors:  C G Solomon; W C Willett; J Rich-Edwards; D J Hunter; M J Stampfer; G A Colditz; J E Manson
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 19.112

3.  Plasma insulin and glucose responses of healthy subjects to varying glucose loads during three-hour oral glucose tolerance tests.

Authors:  A Castro; J P Scott; D P Grettie; D Macfarlane; R E Bailey
Journal:  Diabetes       Date:  1970-11       Impact factor: 9.461

Review 4.  Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems.

Authors:  J A Swets
Journal:  Science       Date:  1988-06-03       Impact factor: 47.728

5.  The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

Authors:  J A Hanley; B J McNeil
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1982-04       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Relationships of infant birth size to maternal lipoproteins, apoproteins, fuels, hormones, clinical chemistries, and body weight at 36 weeks gestation.

Authors:  R H Knopp; R O Bergelin; P W Wahl; C E Walden
Journal:  Diabetes       Date:  1985-06       Impact factor: 9.461

7.  Diagnosing gestational diabetes mellitus: use of a glucose screen without administering the glucose tolerance test.

Authors:  H J Landy; O Gómez-Marín; M J O'Sullivan
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 7.661

8.  The relationship between large-for-gestational-age infants and glycemic control in women with gestational diabetes.

Authors:  O Langer; R Mazze
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1988-12       Impact factor: 8.661

9.  Impact of increasing carbohydrate intolerance on maternal-fetal outcomes in 3637 women without gestational diabetes. The Toronto Tri-Hospital Gestational Diabetes Project.

Authors:  M Sermer; C D Naylor; D J Gare; A B Kenshole; J W Ritchie; D Farine; H R Cohen; K McArthur; S Holzapfel; A Biringer
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 8.661

10.  Classification and diagnosis of diabetes mellitus and other categories of glucose intolerance. National Diabetes Data Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  Diabetes       Date:  1979-12       Impact factor: 9.461

View more
  8 in total

1.  Does screening for gestational diabetes mellitus make a difference?

Authors:  Mathew Sermer
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2003-02-18       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Maternal Glucose and Fatty Acid Kinetics and Infant Birth Weight in Obese Women With Type 2 Diabetes.

Authors:  W Todd Cade; Rachel A Tinius; Dominic N Reeds; Bruce W Patterson; Alison G Cahill
Journal:  Diabetes       Date:  2016-02-09       Impact factor: 9.461

Review 3.  Care of the infant of the diabetic mother.

Authors:  William W Hay
Journal:  Curr Diab Rep       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 4.810

Review 4.  Maternal obesity and fetal metabolic programming: a fertile epigenetic soil.

Authors:  Margaret J R Heerwagen; Melissa R Miller; Linda A Barbour; Jacob E Friedman
Journal:  Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol       Date:  2010-07-14       Impact factor: 3.619

Review 5.  Metformin and gestational diabetes.

Authors:  Charles J Glueck; Naila Goldenberg; Patricia Streicher; Ping Wang
Journal:  Curr Diab Rep       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 4.810

6.  The antepartum glucose values that predict neonatal macrosomia differ from those that predict postpartum prediabetes or diabetes: implications for the diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes.

Authors:  Ravi Retnakaran; Ying Qi; Mathew Sermer; Philip W Connelly; Anthony J G Hanley; Bernard Zinman
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2008-12-09       Impact factor: 5.958

7.  Effect of maternal anthropometry and metabolic parameters on fetal growth.

Authors:  Subarna Mitra; Sujata Misra; Prasanta K Nayak; Jaya Prakash Sahoo
Journal:  Indian J Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2012-09

Review 8.  Biomarkers for Macrosomia Prediction in Pregnancies Affected by Diabetes.

Authors:  Sofia Nahavandi; Jas-Mine Seah; Alexis Shub; Christine Houlihan; Elif I Ekinci
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2018-07-31       Impact factor: 5.555

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.