Literature DB >> 33514342

Which growth standards should be used to identify large- and small-for-gestational age infants of mothers with type 1 diabetes? A pre-specified analysis of the CONCEPTT trial.

Claire L Meek1,2, Rosa Corcoy3,4,5, Elizabeth Asztalos6, Laura C Kusinski7,8, Esther López4,9, Denice S Feig10,11, Helen R Murphy8,12,13.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Offspring of women with type 1 diabetes are at increased risk of fetal growth patterns which are associated with perinatal morbidity. Our aim was to compare rates of large- and small-for-gestational age (LGA; SGA) defined according to different criteria, using data from the Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Type 1 Diabetes Pregnancy Trial (CONCEPTT).
METHODS: This was a pre-specified analysis of CONCEPTT involving 225 pregnant women and liveborn infants from 31 international centres ( ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01788527; registered 11/2/2013). Infants were weighed immediately at birth and GROW, INTERGROWTH and WHO centiles were calculated. Relative risk ratios, sensitivity and specificity were used to assess the different growth standards with respect to perinatal outcomes, including neonatal hypoglycaemia, hyperbilirubinaemia, respiratory distress, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission and a composite neonatal outcome.
RESULTS: Accelerated fetal growth was common, with mean birthweight percentiles of 82.1, 85.7 and 63.9 and LGA rates of 62, 67 and 30% using GROW, INTERGROWTH and WHO standards respectively. Corresponding rates of SGA were 2.2, 1.3 and 8.9% respectively. LGA defined according to GROW centiles showed stronger associations with preterm delivery, neonatal hypoglycaemia, hyperbilirubinaemia and NICU admission. Infants born > 97.7th centile were at highest risk of complications. SGA defined according to INTERGROWTH centiles showed slightly stronger associations with perinatal outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: GROW and INTERGROWTH standards performed similarly and identified similar numbers of neonates with LGA and SGA. GROW-defined LGA and INTERGROWTH-defined SGA had slightly stronger associations with neonatal complications. WHO standards underestimated size in preterm infants and are less applicable for use in type 1 diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov . number NCT01788527 . Trial registered 11/2/2013.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Birth-weight; CONCEPTT; Diabetes; GROW; Growth standards; INTERGROWTH; Large-for-gestational-age; Macrosomia; Pregnancy; Small for gestational age

Year:  2021        PMID: 33514342     DOI: 10.1186/s12884-021-03554-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth        ISSN: 1471-2393            Impact factor:   3.007


  17 in total

1.  The value of customised centiles in assessing perinatal mortality risk associated with parity and maternal size.

Authors:  J Gardosi; B Clausson; A Francis
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2009-06-17       Impact factor: 6.531

2.  Maternal and Neonatal Morbidity Associated With Early Term Delivery of Large-for-Gestational-Age But Nonmacrosomic Neonates.

Authors:  Morgen S Doty; Han-Yang Chen; Baha M Sibai; Suneet P Chauhan
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 7.661

Review 3.  The INTERGROWTH-21st fetal growth standards: toward the global integration of pregnancy and pediatric care.

Authors:  Aris T Papageorghiou; Stephen H Kennedy; Laurent J Salomon; Douglas G Altman; Eric O Ohuma; William Stones; Michael G Gravett; Fernando C Barros; Cesar Victora; Manorama Purwar; Yasmin Jaffer; Julia A Noble; Enrico Bertino; Ruyan Pang; Leila Cheikh Ismail; Ann Lambert; Zulfiqar A Bhutta; José Villar
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 8.661

4.  Customized vs INTERGROWTH-21st standards for the assessment of birthweight and stillbirth risk at term.

Authors:  Andre Francis; Oliver Hugh; Jason Gardosi
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 8.661

5.  Maternal and pathological pregnancy characteristics in customised birthweight centiles and identification of at-risk small-for-gestational-age infants: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  N H Anderson; L C Sadler; A W Stewart; L M E McCowan
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2012-04-02       Impact factor: 6.531

6.  International standards for newborn weight, length, and head circumference by gestational age and sex: the Newborn Cross-Sectional Study of the INTERGROWTH-21st Project.

Authors:  José Villar; Leila Cheikh Ismail; Cesar G Victora; Eric O Ohuma; Enrico Bertino; Doug G Altman; Ann Lambert; Aris T Papageorghiou; Maria Carvalho; Yasmin A Jaffer; Michael G Gravett; Manorama Purwar; Ihunnaya O Frederick; Alison J Noble; Ruyan Pang; Fernando C Barros; Cameron Chumlea; Zulfiqar A Bhutta; Stephen H Kennedy
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2014-09-06       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Improved pregnancy outcomes in women with type 1 and type 2 diabetes but substantial clinic-to-clinic variations: a prospective nationwide study.

Authors:  Helen R Murphy; Ruth Bell; Cher Cartwright; Paula Curnow; Michael Maresh; Margery Morgan; Catherine Sylvester; Bob Young; Nick Lewis-Barned
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  2017-06-08       Impact factor: 10.122

8.  Diabetes and pregnancy: national trends over a 15 year period.

Authors:  Sharon T Mackin; Scott M Nelson; Joannes J Kerssens; Rachael Wood; Sarah Wild; Helen M Colhoun; Graham P Leese; Sam Philip; Robert S Lindsay
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  2018-01-11       Impact factor: 10.122

9.  Continuous glucose monitoring targets in type 1 diabetes pregnancy: every 5% time in range matters.

Authors:  Helen R Murphy
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  2019-06-03       Impact factor: 10.122

10.  Continuous glucose monitoring in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes (CONCEPTT): a multicentre international randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Denice S Feig; Lois E Donovan; Rosa Corcoy; Kellie E Murphy; Stephanie A Amiel; Katharine F Hunt; Elizabeth Asztalos; Jon F R Barrett; J Johanna Sanchez; Alberto de Leiva; Moshe Hod; Lois Jovanovic; Erin Keely; Ruth McManus; Eileen K Hutton; Claire L Meek; Zoe A Stewart; Tim Wysocki; Robert O'Brien; Katrina Ruedy; Craig Kollman; George Tomlinson; Helen R Murphy
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2017-09-15       Impact factor: 79.321

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.