Literature DB >> 29091257

Are women positive for the One Step but negative for the Two Step screening tests for gestational diabetes at higher risk for adverse outcomes?

Claudia Caissutti1, Adeeb Khalifeh2, Gabriele Saccone3, Vincenzo Berghella2.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate if women meeting criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) by the One Step test as per International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria but not by other less strict criteria have adverse pregnancy outcomes compared with GDM-negative controls. The primary outcome was the incidence of macrosomia, defined as birthweight > 4000 g.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Electronic databases were searched from their inception until May 2017. All studies identifying pregnant women negative at the Two Step test, but positive at the One Step test for IADPSG criteria were included. We excluded studies that randomized women to the One Step vs. the Two Step tests; studies that compared different criteria within the same screening method; randomized studies comparing treatments for GDM; and studies comparing incidence of GDM in women doing the One Step test vs. the Two Step test.
RESULTS: Eight retrospective cohort studies, including 29 983 women, were included. Five study groups and four control groups were identified. The heterogeneity between the studies was high. Gestational hypertension, preeclampsia and large for gestational age, as well as in some analyses cesarean delivery, macrosomia and preterm birth, were significantly more frequent, and small for gestational age in some analyses significantly less frequent, in women GDM-positive by the One Step, but not the Two Step.
CONCLUSION: Women meeting criteria for GDM by IADPSG criteria but not by other less strict criteria have an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes such as gestational hypertension, preeclampsia and large for gestational age, compared with GDM-negative controls. Based on these findings, and evidence from other studies that treatment decreases these adverse outcomes, we suggest screening for GDM using the One Step IADPSG criteria.
© 2017 Nordic Federation of Societies of Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Diabetes; gestational diabetes mellitus; macrosomia; neonatal morbidity; neonatal mortality; pregnancy; screening

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29091257     DOI: 10.1111/aogs.13254

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand        ISSN: 0001-6349            Impact factor:   3.636


  6 in total

Review 1.  Diagnostic Strategies for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Review of Current Evidence.

Authors:  Chun-Heng Kuo; Hung-Yuan Li
Journal:  Curr Diab Rep       Date:  2019-12-04       Impact factor: 4.810

2.  Evolution of maternal and neonatal outcomes before and after the adoption of the IADPSG/WHO guidelines in Belgium: A descriptive study of 444,228 pregnancies.

Authors:  Philippe Oriot; Charlotte Leroy; Virginie Van Leeuw; Jean Christophe Philips; Jean François Vanderijst; Aline Vuckovic; Elena Costa; Christian Debauche; Frederic Chantraine
Journal:  Heliyon       Date:  2022-04-12

3.  Resolving the Gestational Diabetes Diagnosis Conundrum: The Need for a Randomized Controlled Trial of Treatment.

Authors:  Rudolf W Bilous; Paul B Jacklin; Michael J Maresh; David A Sacks
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2021-04       Impact factor: 17.152

Review 4.  Screening for Gestational Diabetes during the COVID-19 Pandemic-Current Recommendations and Their Consequences.

Authors:  Anca Maria Panaitescu; Anca Marina Ciobanu; Maria Popa; Irina Duta; Nicolae Gica; Gheorghe Peltecu; Alina Veduta
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2021-04-15       Impact factor: 2.430

Review 5.  Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Diagnostic Approaches and Maternal-Offspring Complications.

Authors:  Joon Ho Moon; Hak Chul Jang
Journal:  Diabetes Metab J       Date:  2022-01-27       Impact factor: 5.376

6.  Association of circulating omega 3, 6 and 9 fatty acids with gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review.

Authors:  Shaghayegh Hosseinkhani; Hojat Dehghanbanadaki; Hossein Aazami; Parvin Pasalar; Mojgan Asadi; Farideh Razi
Journal:  BMC Endocr Disord       Date:  2021-06-15       Impact factor: 2.763

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.