Literature DB >> 24947793

Introduction of IADPSG criteria for the screening and diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus results in improved pregnancy outcomes at a lower cost in a large cohort of pregnant women: the St. Carlos Gestational Diabetes Study.

Alejandra Duran1, Sofía Sáenz2, María J Torrejón3, Elena Bordiú1, Laura Del Valle2, Mercedes Galindo2, Noelia Perez4, Miguel A Herraiz5, Nuria Izquierdo4, Miguel A Rubio1, Isabelle Runkle1, Natalia Pérez-Ferre2, Idalia Cusihuallpa2, Sandra Jiménez2, Nuria García de la Torre2, María D Fernández2, Carmen Montañez2, Cristina Familiar2, Alfonso L Calle-Pascual6.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The use of the new International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups criteria (IADPSGC) for the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) results in an increased prevalence of GDM. Whether their introduction improves pregnancy outcomes has yet to be established. We sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of one-step IADPSGC for screening and diagnosis of GDM compared with traditional two-step Carpenter-Coustan (CC) criteria. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: GDM risk factors and pregnancy and newborn outcomes were prospectively assessed in 1,750 pregnant women from April 2011 to March 2012 using CC and in 1,526 pregnant women from April 2012 to March 2013 using IADPSGC between 24 and 28 weeks of gestation. Both groups received the same treatment and follow-up regimes.
RESULTS: The use of IADPSGC resulted in an important increase in GDM rate (35.5% vs. 10.6%) and an improvement in pregnancy outcomes, with a decrease in the rate of gestational hypertension (4.1 to 3.5%: -14.6%, P < 0.021), prematurity (6.4 to 5.7%: -10.9%, P < 0.039), cesarean section (25.4 to 19.7%: -23.9%, P < 0.002), small for gestational age (7.7 to 7.1%: -6.5%, P < 0.042), large for gestational age (4.6 to 3.7%: -20%, P < 0.004), Apgar 1-min score <7 (3.8 to 3.5%: -9%, P < 0.015), and admission to neonatal intensive care unit (8.2 to 6.2%: -24.4%, P < 0.001). Estimated cost savings was of €14,358.06 per 100 women evaluated using IADPSGC versus the group diagnosed using CC.
CONCLUSIONS: The application of the new IADPSGC was associated with a 3.5-fold increase in GDM prevalence in our study population, as well as significant improvements in pregnancy outcomes, and was cost-effective. Our results support their adoption.
© 2014 by the American Diabetes Association. Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24947793     DOI: 10.2337/dc14-0179

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Diabetes Care        ISSN: 0149-5992            Impact factor:   19.112


  87 in total

1.  A proposal for the use of uniform diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes in Europe: an opinion paper by the European Board & College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (EBCOG).

Authors:  Katrien Benhalima; Chantal Mathieu; Peter Damm; André Van Assche; Roland Devlieger; Gernot Desoye; Rosa Corcoy; Tahir Mahmood; Jacky Nizard; Charles Savona-Ventura; Fidelma Dunne
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  2015-05-08       Impact factor: 10.122

Review 2.  Exercise for pregnant women with gestational diabetes for improving maternal and fetal outcomes.

Authors:  Julie Brown; Gilles Ceysens; Michel Boulvain
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-06-22

3.  Maternal and Neonatal Morbidity for Women Who Would Be Added to the Diagnosis of GDM Using IADPSG Criteria: A Secondary Analysis of the Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome Study.

Authors:  Thaddeus P Waters; Alan R Dyer; Denise M Scholtens; Sharon L Dooley; Elaine Herer; Lynn P Lowe; Jeremy J N Oats; Bengt Persson; David A Sacks; Boyd E Metzger; Patrick M Catalano
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2016-09-15       Impact factor: 19.112

Review 4.  Lifestyle interventions for the treatment of women with gestational diabetes.

Authors:  Julie Brown; Nisreen A Alwan; Jane West; Stephen Brown; Christopher Jd McKinlay; Diane Farrar; Caroline A Crowther
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-05-04

5.  Diagnosis of gestational diabetes, defining the net, refining the catch.

Authors:  Rudy Bilous
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  2015-07-15       Impact factor: 10.122

6.  Gestational Diabetes Management Using Smart Mobile Telemedicine.

Authors:  Mercedes Rigla; Iñaki Martínez-Sarriegui; Gema García-Sáez; Belén Pons; Maria Elena Hernando
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2017-04-18

7.  Maternal and perinatal outcomes after bariatric surgery: a Spanish multicenter study.

Authors:  Irene González; Miguel A Rubio; Fernando Cordido; Irene Bretón; María J Morales; Nuria Vilarrasa; Susana Monereo; Albert Lecube; Assumptas Caixàs; Irene Vinagre; Albert Goday; Pedro P García-Luna
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 4.129

8.  Gestational diabetes mellitus: Screening with fasting plasma glucose.

Authors:  Mukesh M Agarwal
Journal:  World J Diabetes       Date:  2016-07-25

Review 9.  Screening and Diagnosis of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus, Where Do We Stand.

Authors:  P Reddi Rani; Jasmina Begum
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2016-04-01

Review 10.  Prevalence of Gestational Diabetes and Risk of Progression to Type 2 Diabetes: a Global Perspective.

Authors:  Yeyi Zhu; Cuilin Zhang
Journal:  Curr Diab Rep       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 4.810

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.