Wei Zheng1, Wenyu Huang2, Cheng Liu1, Qi Yan1, Li Zhang1, Zhihong Tian1, Xianxian Yuan1, Guanghui Li3. 1. Department of Obstetrics, Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Capital Medical University, No 251, Yaojiayuan Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100026, China. 2. Division of Endocrinology, Metabolism and Molecular Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, USA. 3. Department of Obstetrics, Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Capital Medical University, No 251, Yaojiayuan Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100026, China. yymzyjs2017@126.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and excessive body weight are two key risk factors for adverse perinatal outcomes. However, it is not clear whether restricted gestational weight gain (GWG) is favorable to reduce the risk for adverse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in women with GDM. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the association of GWG after an oral glucose tolerance test with maternal and neonatal outcomes. METHODS: This prospective cohort study assessed the association of GWG after an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) with pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in 3126 women with GDM, adjusted for age, pre-pregnancy body mass index, height, gravidity, parity, adverse history of pregnancy, GWG before OGTT, blood glucose level at OGTT and late pregnancy. The outcomes included the prevalence of pregnancy-induced hypertension (PIH) and preeclampsia, large for gestational age (LGA), small for gestational age, macrosomia, low birth weight, preterm birth, and birth by cesarean section. GDM was diagnosed according to the criteria established by the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups. RESULTS: GWG after OGTT was positively associated with risk for overall adverse pregnancy outcomes (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.50-1.97), LGA (aOR = 1.29, 95%CI = 1.13-1.47), macrosomia (aOR = 1.24, 95%CI = 1.06-1.46) and birth by cesarean section (aOR = 1.91, 95%CI = 1.67-2.19) in women with GDM. Further analyses revealed that a combination of excessive GWG before OGTT and after OGTT increased the risk of PIH and preeclampsia, LGA, macrosomia, and birth by cesarean section compared with adequate GWG throughout pregnancy. In contrast, GWG below the Institute of Medicine guideline after OGTT did not increase the risk of adverse perinatal outcomes despite GWG before OGTT. CONCLUSION: Excessive GWG after OGTT was associated with an elevated risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes, while insufficient GWG after OGTT did not increase the risk of LBW. Restricting GWG after diagnosis of GDM in women with excessive GWG in the first half of pregnancy may be beneficial to prevent PIH and preeclampsia, LGA, macrosomia, and birth by cesarean section.
BACKGROUND:Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and excessive body weight are two key risk factors for adverse perinatal outcomes. However, it is not clear whether restricted gestational weight gain (GWG) is favorable to reduce the risk for adverse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in women with GDM. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the association of GWG after an oral glucose tolerance test with maternal and neonatal outcomes. METHODS: This prospective cohort study assessed the association of GWG after an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) with pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in 3126 women with GDM, adjusted for age, pre-pregnancy body mass index, height, gravidity, parity, adverse history of pregnancy, GWG before OGTT, blood glucose level at OGTT and late pregnancy. The outcomes included the prevalence of pregnancy-induced hypertension (PIH) and preeclampsia, large for gestational age (LGA), small for gestational age, macrosomia, low birth weight, preterm birth, and birth by cesarean section. GDM was diagnosed according to the criteria established by the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups. RESULTS: GWG after OGTT was positively associated with risk for overall adverse pregnancy outcomes (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.50-1.97), LGA (aOR = 1.29, 95%CI = 1.13-1.47), macrosomia (aOR = 1.24, 95%CI = 1.06-1.46) and birth by cesarean section (aOR = 1.91, 95%CI = 1.67-2.19) in women with GDM. Further analyses revealed that a combination of excessive GWG before OGTT and after OGTT increased the risk of PIH and preeclampsia, LGA, macrosomia, and birth by cesarean section compared with adequate GWG throughout pregnancy. In contrast, GWG below the Institute of Medicine guideline after OGTT did not increase the risk of adverse perinatal outcomes despite GWG before OGTT. CONCLUSION: Excessive GWG after OGTT was associated with an elevated risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes, while insufficient GWG after OGTT did not increase the risk of LBW. Restricting GWG after diagnosis of GDM in women with excessive GWG in the first half of pregnancy may be beneficial to prevent PIH and preeclampsia, LGA, macrosomia, and birth by cesarean section.
Authors: Boyd E Metzger; Steven G Gabbe; Bengt Persson; Thomas A Buchanan; Patrick A Catalano; Peter Damm; Alan R Dyer; Alberto de Leiva; Moshe Hod; John L Kitzmiler; Lynn P Lowe; H David McIntyre; Jeremy J N Oats; Yasue Omori; Maria Ines Schmidt Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 17.152
Authors: Matthew W Gillman; Sheryl Rifas-Shiman; Catherine S Berkey; Alison E Field; Graham A Colditz Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Boyd E Metzger; Lynn P Lowe; Alan R Dyer; Elisabeth R Trimble; Udom Chaovarindr; Donald R Coustan; David R Hadden; David R McCance; Moshe Hod; Harold David McIntyre; Jeremy J N Oats; Bengt Persson; Michael S Rogers; David A Sacks Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-05-08 Impact factor: 91.245
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
Authors: Ute M Schaefer-Graf; Kristof Graf; Irina Kulbacka; Siri L Kjos; Joachim Dudenhausen; Klaus Vetter; Emilio Herrera Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2008-07-07 Impact factor: 19.112