| Literature DB >> 28049748 |
Irma Silva-Zolezzi1, Tinu Mary Samuel1, Jörg Spieldenner2.
Abstract
Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is currently defined as glucose intolerance that is of variable severity with onset or first recognition during pregnancy. The Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome Study, including 25 000 nondiabetic pregnant women in 15 centers across the world, reported that an average of 17.8% of pregnancies are affected by GDM and its frequency can be as high as 25.5% in some countries, based on the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups criteria. Nevertheless, true global prevalence estimates of GDM are currently lacking due to the high level of heterogeneity in screening approaches, diagnostic criteria, and differences in the characteristics of the populations that were studied. The presence of systemic high blood glucose levels in pregnancy results in an adverse intrauterine environment, which has been shown to have a negative impact on short- and long-term health outcomes for both the mother and her offspring, including increased risks for the infant to develop obesity and for both mother and child to develop type 2 diabetes mellitus later in life. Epigenetic mechanisms that are directly influenced by environmental factors, including nutrition, may play a key role in shaping these future health risks and may be part of this vicious cycle. This article reviews the burden of GDM and the current evidence that supports maternal nutritional interventions as a promising strategy to break the cycle by addressing risk factors associated with GDM.Entities:
Keywords: food fortification; gestational diabetes mellitus; hyperglycemia; micronutrient; nutrition
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28049748 PMCID: PMC5437972 DOI: 10.1093/nutrit/nuw033
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutr Rev ISSN: 0029-6643 Impact factor: 7.110
Most widely accepted diagnostic criteria for diabetes in pregnancy and GDM,
| Diagnosis | Criteria |
|---|---|
| Diabetes (WHO) | Recorded at any time during the course of pregnancy; one or more of the following criteria: |
| Fasting plasma glucose levels ≥7 mmol/L (126 mg/dL) | |
| 2-h OGTT values ≥11.1 mmol/L (200 mg/dL) after a 75 g oral glucose load | |
| Random plasma glucose levels ≥11.1 mmol/L (200 mg/dL) | |
| GDM (WHO and IADPSG) | When 1 or more of the following results are recorded during routine testing between 24 and 28 wks of pregnancy or at any other time during the course of pregnancy: |
| Fasting plasma glucose levels 5.1–6.9 mmol/L (92–125 mg/dL) | |
| 1-h OGTT values ≥10.0 mmol/L (180 mg/dL) after a 75 g oral glucose load | |
| 2-h OGTT values between 8.5 and 11.0 mmol/L (153–199 mg/dL) after a 75 g oral glucose load |
Abbreviations: GDM, gestational diabetes mellitus; IADPSG, International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups; OGTT, oral glucose tolerance test; WHO, World Health Organization.
Risks of subsequent outcomes in mother and offspring exposed to prepregnancy overweight and/or obesity, or GDM, or the combination of both conditions
| Outcome | OR or RR (95% CI) vs women without the condition(s) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Overweight and/or obesity | GDM | Overweight and/or obesity and GDM | |
| Postpartum T2DM (mother) | 3.89 (2.53–6.00) | 7.43 (4.79–11.51) | 8.66 (2.27–32.94) |
| High birth weight (>90th percentile) | 1.73 (1.50–2.00) | 2.19 (1.93–2.47) | 3.62 (3.04–4.32) |
| High neonatal adiposity (>90th percentile) | 1.65 (1.41–1.93) | 1.98 (1.73–2.27) | 3.69 (3.06–4.44) |
| Childhood obesity (girls with BMI >85th percentile at age 6–8 yrs) | 1.71 (1.08–2.72) | 3.56 (1.28–9.92) | 5.6 (1.70–18.2) |
| T2DM later in life (offspring) | 2.5 (1.3–5.0) | 3.9 (1.1–14.5) | 19.2 (6.1–60.8) |
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; GDM, gestational diabetes mellitus; OR, odds ratio; RR, relative risk; T2DM, type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Diet-, physical activity-, combined diet and physical activity-, and nutrient-based interventions on prevention of GDM and their impacts on related pregnancy and infant outcomes, based on recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses
| Reference | Study design | Study population | Description of intervention | Effect of intervention on pregnancy outcomes | Effect of intervention on infant outcomes | Limitations and comments | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dietary interventions including dietary advice | ||||||||
| Tanentsapf et al. (2011) | Systematic review of 13 RCTs and quasi-RCTs | Healthy normal weight or overweight and obese women with a singleton pregnancy | Intervention: any dietary intervention aiming at preventing excessive GWG or reducing pregnancy-related complications, including low-fat, low-carbohydrate, or low-energy diets, dietary education about healthy eating, and nutritional advice on how to stay within the GWG guidelines. Control: standard of care | Reduction in GWG (10 RCTs, n = 1434) (WMD = −1.92 kg; 95% CI: −3.65, −0.19). Reduction in C-section incidence (6 RCTs, n = 609) (RR = 0.75; 95% CI: 0.60–0.94). No significant difference on pre-eclampsia and GDM | No significant difference on birth weight, preterm birth, and macrosomia LGA, SGA, and neonatal hypoglycemia not reported | Comparison of GWG is of concern as no common standard for calculations was applied: some studies calculated GWG based on self-reported prepregnancy weight, some did not report the means of data collection when calculating GWG, and in some the final weight was taken at the day of delivery while in some at the last clinic visit prior to delivery. There was a lack of statistical power to capture small intervention effects on some clinical outcomes. There was a high risk of bias in 7 out of 13 studies | ||
| Physical activity interventions | ||||||||
| Sanabria-Martinez et al. (2015) | Meta-analysis of 13 RCTs | Healthy pregnant women who were sedentary or had low levels of physical activity | Intervention: structured physical exercise programs of low to moderate intensity. Control: standard prenatal care with no physical exercise received | Decreased risk of GDM (8 RCTs, n = 2501) (RR = 0.69; 95% CI: 0.52–0.91). Decreased GWG (13 RCTs, n = 2873) (WMD = −1.14 kg; 95% CI: − 1.50, −0.78). Outcomes on pre-eclampsia and C-section not reported | Infant outcomes including birth weight, LGA, SGA, macrosomia, and neonatal hypoglycemia not reported | Studies were of medium to low quality with a high risk of bias. Physical activity performed outside the program was not assessed. Different diagnostic criteria for GDM were used in each of the studies. Pregnant women participating in these studies were volunteers and may have had a higher level of adherence than the general population | ||
| Wiebe et al. (2015) | Meta-analysis of 28 RCTs | Pregnant women who were at low risk for GDM and women without specific pregnancy complications | Intervention: structured and supervised prenatal exercises. Control: standard care | Reduced GWG (15 RCTs, n = 5322) (WMD = −1.1 kg; 95% CI: −1.61, −0.62). Reduced odds of cesarean delivery (17 RCTs, n = 5322) (OR = 0.81; 95% CI: 0.68–0.96). Outcomes on pre-eclampsia and GDM not reported | 32% reduction in the odds of having an LGA baby (15 RCTs, n = 5322) (OR = 0.68; 95% CI: 0.54–0.87). No simultaneous risk of having an SGA baby (9 RCTs, n = 5322) (OR = 1.10; 95% CI: 0.73–1.66). Reduction in newborn birth weight (26 RCTs, n = 5215) (WMD, −28.35 g; 95% CI, −56.04, −0.66 g) Outcomes on macrosomia and neonatal hypoglycemia not reported | High heterogeneity was reported for reduction in GWG that could be explained by variability in exercise duration, volume, and adherence between trials | ||
| Russo et al. (2015) | Meta-analysis of 10 RCTs | Pregnant women with out GDM at baseline | Intervention: exercise interventions that included an aerobic component Control: standard care | 28% reduced risk of GDM (10 RCTs, n = 3401) (RR = 0.72; 95% CI: 9%–42%) Outcomes on GWG, pre-eclampsia, and C-section not reported | Infant outcomes on LGA, macrosomia, birth weight, SGA, and neonatal hypoglycemia not reported | There was wide variation in adherence to an intervention protocol, and in some studies it was as low as 16%. There was a high loss to follow-up of 33%, reducing power, and potentially introducing differential bias. Differences in study design and intervention content, overall limited number of studies, and general null findings in individual studies limit the ability to detect the effectiveness of specific interventions and their application to practice. Variable GDM diagnosis criteria was used between studies. Possible underestimation of the association between participation in an exercise intervention and risk of GDM due to an inconsistent classification/misclassification of GDM | ||
| Han et al. (2012) | Cochrane systematic review of 5 RCTs or cluster RCTs | Pregnant women, regardless of age, gestation, parity, or plurality, all without pre-existing type 1 or T2DM | Intervention: supervised exercise sessions and exercise advice. Control: standard antenatal care with normal daily activities | No significant difference in GDM incidence, GWG, C-section, or pre-eclampsia | No significant differences in birth weight, macrosomia, and SGA LGA and neonatal hypoglycemia not reported | No trial reported on the primary outcomes for the review of LGA. Many of the trials were of small sample size. All the trials were conducted in high-income countries | ||
| Combined diet and physical activity interventions | ||||||||
| Bain et al. (2015) | Cochrane systematic review of 13 RCTs and cluster-RCTs | Pregnant women, regardless of age, gestation, parity, or plurality | Intervention: combined diet (dietary advice, including low-GI and high-fiber diet) and exercise interventions (exercise advice, providing exercise sessions). Control: standard care | A trend observed toward reduced GWG (8 RCTs, n = 2707) (MD = −0.76 kg; 95% CI: −1.55, 0.03). No significant differences in the risk of GDM, pre-eclampsia, or C-section | Reduced risk of preterm birth (5 RCTs, n = 2713) (RR = 0.71; 95% CI: 0.55–0.93). No significant difference in risk of LGA, macrosomia, birth weight, SGA, or neonatal hypoglycemia | Huge variations in the quality of trials, characteristics of the interventions, populations assessed, reporting of outcomes, and outcome definitions (GDM diagnosis criteria) between trials Majority of studies were conducted in western population and therefore have limited applicability in low- and middle-income countries | ||
| Muktabhant et al. (2015) | Cochrane systematic review of 49 RCTs | Pregnant women of any BMI (normal BMI or overweight and/or obese women) | Intervention: any diet or exercise, or both, intervention (e.g., healthy eating plan, low glycemic diet, exercise intervention, health education, lifestyle counseling). Control: standard or routine care | Reduced risk of excessive GWG by 20% (24 RCTs, n = 7096) (RR = 0.80; 95% CI: 0.73–0.87). GWG not analyzed due to substantial heterogeneity No significant difference in C-section and pre-eclampsia GDM not reported | No significant difference in preterm birth, macrosomia, LGA, birth weight, SGA, or neonatal hypoglycemia | Most studies included were carried out in developed countries, and it is not clear whether these results are widely applicable to lower-income settings. Interventions were often multifaceted and were quite heterogeneous in approach, e.g., in the timing, duration, intensity, content, and delivery | ||
| Thangaratinam et al. (2012) | Systematic review of 40 RCTs and 48 non-randomized and observational studies | Healthy pregnant women or those who were overweight or obese | Intervention: combination of dietary and physical activity, interventions with the potential to influence weight change in pregnant women (dietary interventions: balanced diet of carbohydrates, fat,and protein, moderate energy and caloric restriction based on individual requirements, low-fat and low-cholesterol diets and the use of a food diary for monitoring; physical activity interventions: weight-bearing sessions, walking for 30 min a day, and low-intensity resistance training or behavioral counseling intervention).Control:standard of care | Reduction in GWG in the intervention group of 0.97 kg (30 RCTs, n = 4503) (95% CI: −1.60, −0.34 kg) The largest reduction in GWG was observed in the dietary intervention studies, with an MD of −3.36 kg (95% CI: −4.73, −1.99 kg), followed by mixed approach, with an MD of −0.57 kg (95% CI: −1.60, 0.65 kg). Significant reduction in the incidence of pre-eclampsia of 26% (10 RCT, n = 3072) (RR = 0.74; 95% CI: 0.59– 0.92) No significant differences in incidence of C-section or GDM | Reduction in the mean birth weight (28 RCTs, n = 4573) of 0.07 kg (95% CI: −0.14, −0.01 kg) Reduced risk of LGA (12 RCTs, n = 3021) (RR, 0.73; 95% CI: 0.54–0.99) No differences in SGA, preterm birth, or neonatal hypoglycemia | There was a lack of detail about the components of the intervention in some of the included studies, gestational age at which the intervention was commenced, its frequency, and the method of delivery. The estimate of reduced GWG with diet was associated with significant heterogeneity | ||
| Han et al. (2012) | Cochrane systematic review of 4 RCTs and cluster RCTs | Pregnant women with hyperglycemia not meeting diagnostic criteria for GDM and T2DM regardless of gestation, age, parity, or plurality | Intervention: any type of dietary advice (standard or individualized) with metabolic monitoring. Control: standard antenatal care | No significant difference in C-section, GWG, insulin, or oral hypoglycemic agent required for hyperglycemia or pre-eclampsia Outcome on GDM not reported | Reduced risk for macrosomia (3 RCTs, n = 438) (RR = 0.38; 95% CI: 0.19–0.74) Reduced risk for LGA (3 RCTs, n = 438) (RR = 0.37; 95% CI: 0.20–0.66) Significantly lower birth weight (4 RCTs, n = 521) (MD = − 117.33 g; 95% CI: −198.72, −35.94) No significant differences in preterm birth, SGA, or neonatal hypoglycemia | Results of this review were based on 4 small RCTs with moderate to high risk of bias without follow-up outcomes for both women and their babies. Due to the inconsistencies existing in GDM diagnosis around the world, the review included women with various degrees of pregnancy hyperglycemia and may have included some women who could be diagnosed with GDM when using a different set of criteria | ||
| Interventions with specific nutrients | ||||||||
| Long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (LC-PUFA) | ||||||||
| Szajewska et al. (2006) | Meta-analysis of 6 RCTs | Healthy pregnant women | Intervention: LCPUFA supplementation, but not the precursor essential FAs such as α-linolenic and linoleic acids. Control: placebo or no supplementation | Greater duration of pregnancy (6 RCTs, n = 1278) (WMD = 1.57 d; 95% CI: 0.35–2.78 d). No significant difference in the rate of pre-eclampsia, C-section, or GDM Outcomes on GWG not reported | No significant difference in birth weight and preterm birth. Macrosomia, LGA, SGA, and neonatal hypoglycemia not reported | Small sample sizes as well as limited number of trials. There was marked variability among study populations and baseline n-3 LCPUFA status, and the interventions tested that may have decreased the sensitivity for detecting possible effects | ||
| Zhou et al. (2012) | Double-blind, multicenter RCT | Healthy women with singleton pregnancies and ≤21 wks of gestation at study entry | Intervention: 3500 mg capsules of DHA-rich fish-oil concentrate daily from trial entry to birth. Control: 3500 mg vegetable oil capsules without DHA from trial entry to birth | No significant difference in the relative risk for GDM and pre-eclampsia. Outcomes on GWG and C-section not reported | Increased macrosomia in the fish oil-supplemented group than in the control group (16.3% vs 12.8%). No significant difference in birth weight, SGA, LGA, or neonatal hypoglycemia Preterm birth not reported | Fish oil supplements in the trial began in the second half of pregnancy, so not known whether supplementation initiated earlier could lower the risk of GDM or pre-eclampsia | ||
| Vitamin D | ||||||||
| De Regil et al. (2016) | Cochrane systematic review of 15 RCTs, quasi-RCTs, or cluster RCTs | Pregnant women of any gestational or chronological age, parity, and number of fetuses; pregnant women with pre-existing conditions (i.e., GDM) were excluded | Intervention: daily, weekly, or monthly oral supplementation with vitamin D (D2, D3, or not specified) alone or in combination with calcium. Control: no intervention or placebo | Reduced risk of pre-eclampsia (3 RCTs, n = 1114) (RR = 0.51; 95% CI: 0.32–0.80) for vitamin D + calcium No significant differences observed for GDM and C-section incidence GWG and fasting glucose not included in the analysis | Reduced risk of preterm birth in (3 RCTs, n = 477) (RR = 0.36; 95% CI: 0.14–0.93), for vitamin D, but increased risk of preterm birth (3 RCTs, n = 798) (RR = 1.57; 95% CI: 1.02–2.43) for vitamin D + calcium. No significant difference was observed for birth weight. SGA, LGA, macrosomia, neonatal hypoglycemia, and shoulder dystocia not included in the analysis | Across RCT, the doses and types of vitamin D supplements, gestational age at first administration, and outcomes were very heterogeneous Heterogeneity probably due to methodological differences to assess serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D. GDM diagnosis was included in only 2 out of the 15 trials | ||
| Perez Lopez et al. (2015) | Systematic review and meta-analysis of 13 RCTs | Pregnant women of any gestational or chronologic age and parity without previous disease history | Intervention: Any dose of vitamin D2/D3 supplementation, alone or in combination with multivitamin, calcium, or iron. Control: a control (placebo or active) | No significant differences were observed for GDM, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, or C-section incidence. GWG, insulin sensitivity, and fasting glucose not included in the analysis | Increased birth weight (10 RCTs, n = 1489) (mean difference = 107.60; 95% CI: 59.86–155.33). No significant difference observed for SGA LGA, macrosomia, neonatal hypoglycemia, preterm birth, and shoulder dystocia not included in the analysis | Across RCTs, the doses and types of vitamin D supplements, gestational age at first administration, and outcomes were very heterogeneous GDM diagnosis was only included in 3 out of the 13 trials | ||
| Myo-inositol | ||||||||
| Crawford et al. (2015) | Cochrane systematic review of 4 RCTs | Healthy pregnant women at high risk of GDM, including those who were obese or had a family history of T2DM, all without pre-existing type 1 or type 2 diabetes | Intervention: 2 g of myo-inositol + 200 µg of folic acid twice a day, or 2 g of myo-inositol + 400 µg of D-chiro-inositol + 400 µg of folic acid + 10 mg of manganese once a day. Control: 200 µg of folic acid twice a day or placebo (not specified) | Reduced risk of GDM (3 RCTs, n = 502) (RR = 0.43; 95% CI: 0.29–0.64) Reduced fasting glucose (OGTT) (3 RCTs, n = 502) (mean difference = −0.20 mmol/L; 95% CI: −0.28–0.12) No significant differences were observed for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and C-section rate, and GWG | No significant differences were observed for birth weight, macrosomia, neonatal hypoglycemia, preterm birth, or shoulder dystocia LGA not reported in any study SGA not included in the analysis | All RCTs were conducted in Italy. The trials had small sample sizes, and 2 trials were open-label | ||
| Zheng et al. (2015) | Systematic review and meta-analysis of 5 RCTs | Healthy pregnant women at high risk of GDM, including those who were obese and had a family history of T2DM or who had PCOS, all diagnosed with GDM and all without pre-existing type 1 or type 2 diabetes | Intervention: 2 g of myo-inositol + 200 µg of folic acid twice a day, or a daily dose of 4 g of myo-inositol + 400 µg of folic acid Control: 200 µg of folic acid twice a day, or a daily dose of 400 µg of folic acid + 1.5 g of metformin | Reduced risk of GDM (4 RCTs, n = 444) (RR = 0.29; 95% CI: 0.19–0.44) Reduced fasting glucose (OGTT) (4 RCTs, n = 444) (mean difference = −0.36 mmol/L; 95% CI: −0.51, −0.21). Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, C-section, and GWG not included in the analysis | Reduced birth weight (3 RCTs, n = 353) (mean difference = −116.98 g; 95% CI: −208.87, −25.09) Reduced risk of neonatal hypoglycemia in 1 RCT, n = 73 (OR = 0.04; 95% CI: 0.00–0.68). No significant differences observed for macrosomia, preterm birth, and shoulder dystocia LGA not reported in any study SGA not included in the analysis | All RCTs included were open-label and conducted in Italy. One of the trials included is a retrospective case–control study and may have increased the likelihood of random assignments. Inclusion criteria were heterogeneous, and there were variations in the components of the intervention. Only in the analysis of the fasting glucose outcome was 1 study with women already diagnosed with GDM included | ||
| Rogozinska et al. (2015) | Systematic review and meta-analysis of 20 RCTs | Low- and high-risk women, including those with at least 1 of the following: obesity, previous history of GDM or fetal macrosomia, advanced maternal age, and family history of diabetes | Intervention: Myo-inositol (2 g of myo-inositol + 200 µg of folic acid twice a day) or diet with probiotics. Control: 200 µg of folic acid twice a day, or a daily dose of 400 µg of folic acid + 1.5 g of metformin | Reduced risk of GDM (1 RCT, n = 220) (RR = 0.40; 95% CI: 0.16–0.99) No significant differences observed for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and C-section GWG and fasting glucose (OGTT) not included in the analysis | Reduced birth weight (1 RCT, n = 220) (mean difference = −0.51 g; 95% CI: −0.79, −0.22). No significant difference was observed for shoulder dystocia and preterm birth LGA not reported in any study SGA, macrosomia, and neonatal hypoglycemia not included in the analysis | Only 1 study using myo-inositol as intervention was included in this analysis. Variable definition of GDM between studies | ||
| Probiotics | ||||||||
| Barrett et al. (2014) | Cochrane systematic review of 1 RCT | Pregnant women not previously diagnosed with diabetes mellitus, including those with GDM in a previous pregnancy but no evidence of diabetes mellitus or GDM in the current before entering the trial | Intervention: diet + probiotics (a mix of Control: placebo (microcrystalline cellulose and dextrose anhydrate) + intensive dietary counseling | Reduced risk of GDM (1 RCT, n = 225) (RR = 0.38; 95% CI: 0.20–0.70) No significant difference was observed for C-section Fasting glucose (OGTT), hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, and GWG not reported | Reduced birth weight (1 RCT, n = 256) (mean difference = −127.1 g; 95% CI: −320.46, 32.46) No significant difference was observed for preterm birth SGA, LGA, macrosomia, neonatal hypoglycemia, and shoulder dystocia not reported | Of 5 RCTs identified, only 1 had reported results; all other were ongoing studies | ||
| Rogozinska et al. (2015) | Systematic review and meta-analysis of 20 RCTs | Low-risk and high-risk women, including those with at least 1 of the following: obesity, previous history of GDM or fetal macrosomia, advanced maternal age, and family history of diabetes | Intervention: diet + probiotics (mix of Control: placebo + intensive dietary counseling | Reduced risk of GDM (1 RCT, n = 170) (RR = 0.40; 95% CI: 0.20–0.78) No significant difference observed for C-section. Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy not reported. Fasting glucose (OGTT) and GWG not included in the analysis | Birth weight, SGA, LGA, macrosomia, neonatal hypoglycemia, preterm birth, and shoulder dystocia not reported | Just 1 study in Finnish population was included in this analysis. Variable definitions of GDM between studies | ||
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; GDM, gestational diabetes mellitus; GWG, gestational weight gain; LGA, large for gestational age; OGTT, oral glucose tolerance test; PCOS, polycystic ovarian syndrome; RCT, randomized control trial; RR, relative risk; SGA, small for gestational age.