AIMS: To compare obstetric and perinatal outcomes in women with Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes and relate these to maternal risk factors. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of 682 consecutive diabetic pregnancies in East Anglia during 2006-2009. Relationships between congenital malformation, perinatal mortality and perinatal morbidity (large for gestational age, preterm delivery, neonatal care) with maternal age, parity, ethnicity, glycaemic control, obesity and social disadvantage were examined using bivariable and multivariate models. RESULTS: There were 408 (59.8%) Type 1 and 274 (40.2%) Type 2 diabetes pregnancies. Women with Type 2 diabetes were older (P < 0.001), heavier (P < 0.0001), more frequently multiparous (P < 0.001), more ethnically diverse (p < 0.0001) and more socially disadvantaged (P = 0.0004). Although women with Type 2 diabetes had shorter duration of diabetes (P < 0.0001) and better pre-conception glycaemic control [HbA(1c) 52 mmol/mol (6.9%) Type 2 diabetes vs. 63 mmol/l (7.9%) Type 1 diabetes; p < 0.0001), rates of congenital malformation and perinatal mortality were comparable. Women with Type 2 diabetes had fewer large-for-gestational-age infants (37.6 vs. 52.9%, P < 0.0008), fewer preterm deliveries (17.5 vs. 37.1%, P < 0.0001) and their offspring had fewer neonatal care admissions (29.8 vs. 43.2%, P = 0.001). Third trimester HbA(1c) (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.09-1.67, P = 0.006) and social disadvantage (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.67-0.98; P = 0.03) were risk factors for large for gestational age. CONCLUSIONS: Despite increased age, parity, obesity and social disadvantage, women with Type 2 diabetes had better glycaemic control, fewer large-for-gestational-age infants, fewer preterm deliveries and fewer neonatal care admissions. Better tools are needed to improve glycaemic control and reduce the rates of large for gestational age, particularly in Type 1 diabetes.
AIMS: To compare obstetric and perinatal outcomes in women with Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes and relate these to maternal risk factors. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of 682 consecutive diabetic pregnancies in East Anglia during 2006-2009. Relationships between congenital malformation, perinatal mortality and perinatal morbidity (large for gestational age, preterm delivery, neonatal care) with maternal age, parity, ethnicity, glycaemic control, obesity and social disadvantage were examined using bivariable and multivariate models. RESULTS: There were 408 (59.8%) Type 1 and 274 (40.2%) Type 2 diabetes pregnancies. Women with Type 2 diabetes were older (P < 0.001), heavier (P < 0.0001), more frequently multiparous (P < 0.001), more ethnically diverse (p < 0.0001) and more socially disadvantaged (P = 0.0004). Although women with Type 2 diabetes had shorter duration of diabetes (P < 0.0001) and better pre-conception glycaemic control [HbA(1c) 52 mmol/mol (6.9%) Type 2 diabetes vs. 63 mmol/l (7.9%) Type 1 diabetes; p < 0.0001), rates of congenital malformation and perinatal mortality were comparable. Women with Type 2 diabetes had fewer large-for-gestational-age infants (37.6 vs. 52.9%, P < 0.0008), fewer preterm deliveries (17.5 vs. 37.1%, P < 0.0001) and their offspring had fewer neonatal care admissions (29.8 vs. 43.2%, P = 0.001). Third trimester HbA(1c) (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.09-1.67, P = 0.006) and social disadvantage (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.67-0.98; P = 0.03) were risk factors for large for gestational age. CONCLUSIONS: Despite increased age, parity, obesity and social disadvantage, women with Type 2 diabetes had better glycaemic control, fewer large-for-gestational-age infants, fewer preterm deliveries and fewer neonatal care admissions. Better tools are needed to improve glycaemic control and reduce the rates of large for gestational age, particularly in Type 1 diabetes.
Authors: H R Murphy; R C Temple; V E Ball; J M Roland; S Steel; R Zill-E-Huma; D Simmons; L R Royce; T C Skinner Journal: Diabet Med Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 4.359
Authors: Mary C M Macintosh; Kate M Fleming; Jaron A Bailey; Pat Doyle; Jo Modder; Dominique Acolet; Shona Golightly; Alison Miller Journal: BMJ Date: 2006-06-16
Authors: Helen R Murphy; Gerry Rayman; Katherine Duffield; Karen S Lewis; Susan Kelly; Balroop Johal; Duncan Fowler; Rosemary C Temple Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2007-07-31 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Mary E Pennant; Leslie J C Bluck; M Loredana Marcovecchio; Burak Salgin; Roman Hovorka; David B Dunger Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2008-07-23 Impact factor: 17.152
Authors: Padma Kaul; Samantha L Bowker; Anamaria Savu; Roseanne O Yeung; Lois E Donovan; Edmond A Ryan Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2018-11-13 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: I-Lynn Lee; Elizabeth L M Barr; Danielle Longmore; Federica Barzi; Alex D H Brown; Christine Connors; Jacqueline A Boyle; Marie Kirkwood; Vanya Hampton; Michael Lynch; Zhong X Lu; Kerin O'Dea; Jeremy Oats; H David McIntyre; Paul Zimmet; Jonathan E Shaw; Louise J Maple-Brown Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2020-01-08 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Hannah H Chang; Jim Larson; Hannah Blencowe; Catherine Y Spong; Christopher P Howson; Sarah Cairns-Smith; Eve M Lackritz; Shoo K Lee; Elizabeth Mason; Andrew C Serazin; Salimah Walani; Joe Leigh Simpson; Joy E Lawn Journal: Lancet Date: 2012-11-16 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Marine Nalbandyan; Meredith M Howley; Christopher M Cunniff; Paul A Romitti; Marilyn L Browne Journal: Am J Med Genet A Date: 2019-07-11 Impact factor: 2.802