Subeen Hong1,1, Seung Mi Lee1, Soo Heon Kwak2, Byoung Jae Kim1,3, Ja Nam Koo4, Ig Hwan Oh4, Sohee Oh5, Sun Min Kim1,3, Sue Shin6,7, Won Kim2,8, Sae Kyung Joo2,8, Errol R Norwitz9, Souphaphone Louangsenlath10, Chan Wook Park1, Jong Kwan Jun1, Joong Shin Park11. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. 3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul Metropolitan Government Seoul National University Boramae Medical Center, Seoul, Korea. 4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul Women's Hospital, Incheon, Korea. 5. Department of Biostatistics, Seoul Metropolitan Government Seoul National University Boramae Medical Center, Seoul, Korea. 6. Department of Laboratory Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. 7. Department of Laboratory Medicine, Seoul Metropolitan Government Seoul National University Boramae Medical Center, Seoul, Korea. 8. Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul Metropolitan Government Seoul National University Boramae Medical Center, Seoul, Korea. 9. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA. 10. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Health Science, Vientiane, Laos. 11. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. jsparkmd@snu.ac.kr.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The definition of the high-risk group for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) defined by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists was changed from the criteria composed of five historic/demographic factors (old criteria) to the criteria consisting of 11 factors (new criteria) in 2017. To compare the predictive performances between these two sets of criteria. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of a large prospective cohort study of non-diabetic Korean women with singleton pregnancies designed to examine the risk of GDM in women with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Maternal fasting blood was taken at 10 to 14 weeks of gestation and measured for glucose and lipid parameters. GDM was diagnosed by the two-step approach. RESULTS: Among 820 women, 42 (5.1%) were diagnosed with GDM. Using the old criteria, 29.8% (n=244) of women would have been identified as high risk versus 16.0% (n=131) using the new criteria. Of the 42 women who developed GDM, 45.2% (n=19) would have been mislabeled as not high risk by the old criteria versus 50.0% (n=21) using the new criteria (1-sensitivity, 45.2% vs. 50.0%, P>0.05). Among the 778 patients who did not develop GDM, 28.4% (n=221) would have been identified as high risk using the old criteria versus 14.1% (n=110) using the new criteria (1-specificity, 28.4% vs. 14.1%, P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Compared with the old criteria, use of the new criteria would have decreased the number of patients identified as high risk and thus requiring early GDM screening by half (from 244 [29.8%] to 131 [16.0%]).
BACKGROUND: The definition of the high-risk group for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) defined by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists was changed from the criteria composed of five historic/demographic factors (old criteria) to the criteria consisting of 11 factors (new criteria) in 2017. To compare the predictive performances between these two sets of criteria. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of a large prospective cohort study of non-diabetic Korean women with singleton pregnancies designed to examine the risk of GDM in women with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Maternal fasting blood was taken at 10 to 14 weeks of gestation and measured for glucose and lipid parameters. GDM was diagnosed by the two-step approach. RESULTS: Among 820 women, 42 (5.1%) were diagnosed with GDM. Using the old criteria, 29.8% (n=244) of women would have been identified as high risk versus 16.0% (n=131) using the new criteria. Of the 42 women who developed GDM, 45.2% (n=19) would have been mislabeled as not high risk by the old criteria versus 50.0% (n=21) using the new criteria (1-sensitivity, 45.2% vs. 50.0%, P>0.05). Among the 778 patients who did not develop GDM, 28.4% (n=221) would have been identified as high risk using the old criteria versus 14.1% (n=110) using the new criteria (1-specificity, 28.4% vs. 14.1%, P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Compared with the old criteria, use of the new criteria would have decreased the number of patients identified as high risk and thus requiring early GDM screening by half (from 244 [29.8%] to 131 [16.0%]).
Authors: Seung Mi Lee; Suhyun Hwangbo; Errol R Norwitz; Ja Nam Koo; Ig Hwan Oh; Eun Saem Choi; Young Mi Jung; Sun Min Kim; Byoung Jae Kim; Sang Youn Kim; Gyoung Min Kim; Won Kim; Sae Kyung Joo; Sue Shin; Chan-Wook Park; Taesung Park; Joong Shin Park Journal: Clin Mol Hepatol Date: 2021-10-15
Authors: Seung Mi Lee; Yonghyun Nam; Eun Saem Choi; Young Mi Jung; Vivek Sriram; Jacob S Leiby; Ja Nam Koo; Ig Hwan Oh; Byoung Jae Kim; Sun Min Kim; Sang Youn Kim; Gyoung Min Kim; Sae Kyung Joo; Sue Shin; Errol R Norwitz; Chan-Wook Park; Jong Kwan Jun; Won Kim; Dokyoon Kim; Joong Shin Park Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-09-22 Impact factor: 4.996