| Literature DB >> 35794663 |
Sepideh Mashayekh-Amiri1, Sakineh Mohammad-Alizadeh-Charandabi1, Somaiyeh Abdolalipour1, Mojgan Mirghafourvand2,3,4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus [GDM] and of its most important predisposing factor, i.e. overweight and obesity, have increased dramatically over the past 20 years. Therefore, the aim of this study was to systematically review the articles on the effect of myo-inositol supplementation on the prevention of GDM in pregnant women with overweight and obesity.Entities:
Keywords: GDM; Gestational diabetes mellitus; Myo-inositol supplementation; Overweight and obese
Year: 2022 PMID: 35794663 PMCID: PMC9258131 DOI: 10.1186/s13098-022-00862-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Diabetol Metab Syndr ISSN: 1758-5996 Impact factor: 5.395
Characteristics of included studies
| Authors | Location | Type of the study | Inclusion criteria | Population | Intervention | Results | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIb | Placebo | ||||||
| Danna, 2015 | Italy | Randomized controlled open-label study | BMI > 30 kg/m2 Obese first-trimester fasting plasma glucose < 126 mg/dl | 110 | 110 | 2 g MI + 200 mcg folic acid vs. 200 mcg folic acid twice/day | The GDM rate was significantly reduced in the MI group compared with the control group, 14.0% compared with 33.6%, respectively [P < 0.001; odds ratio 0.34, 95% confidence interval 0.17– 0.68] |
| Santamaria, 2016 | Italy | Randomized controlled open-label study | BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2 and < 30 kg/m2 Overweight first-trimester fasting plasma glucose < 126 mg/dl and/or random glycaemia < 200 mg/dl | 110 | 110 | 2 g MI + 200 mcg folic acid vs. 200 mcg folic acid twice/day | The incidence of GDM was significantly lower in the MI group compared to the placebo group [11.6% versus 27.4%, respectively, p¼0.004]. MI treatment was associated with a 67% risk reduction of developing GDM [OR 0.33; 95% CI 0.15, 0.70] |
| Vitale, 2020 | Italy | Randomized controlled open-label study | BMI > 25 kg/m2 and < 30 kg/m2 Overweight first-trimester fasting plasma glucose < 126 mg/dl and/or random glycaemia < 200 mg/dl | 110 | 110 | 2 g MI + 200 mcg folic acid vs. 200 mcg folic acid twice/day | The global incidence of GDM was significantly reduced in the MI group [n = 9, 8.2%] compared with the placebo group [n = 24, 21.2%] [p = 0.006] |
| Esmailzadeh,2022 | Iran | Randomized controlled double-blind study | BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2 and < 30 kg/m2 Overweight first-trimester fasting plasma glucose < 126 mg/dl and/or random glycaemia < 200 mg/dl | 30 | 30 | 2 g MI + 200 mcg folic acid vs. 400 mcg folic acid daily | The incidence of gestational diabetes in MI group was noticeably minimized compared with that of the control group [RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.09–0.94, p = 0.037] |
aBMI Body mass index, bMI Myoinositol, bGDM Gestational diabetes mellitus
Fig. 1PRISMA flow diagram [2020] of screening, selection process and inclusion study
Fig. 2Risk of bias graph: review authors’ judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies
Fig. 3Risk of bias summary: review authors’ judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study
Fig. 4Myoinositol vs. Placebo, outcome: Gestational diabetes mellitus
Fig. 5Myoinositol vs. Placebo, outcome: FG-OGTT
Fig. 6Myoinositol vs. Placebo, outcome: 1 h-OGTT
Fig. 7Myoinositol vs. Placebo, outcome: 2 h-OGTT
Fig. 8Myoinositol vs. Placebo, Pregnancy outcomes
Use of the Myoinositol versus Placebo
| No. of studies | Design | Risk of bias | Inconsistency | Indirectness | Imprecision | Other considerations | Use of the MI | No Use of the MI | Pooled effect Relativea [95% CI] | Final judgment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gestational diabetes rate [GDM Rate] | ||||||||||
| 4 | RCTs | Seriousb | No serious | No serious | No serious | No serious | 38/339 | 99/351 | OR 0.32 [0.21 to 0.]48] | ⨁⨁⨁Ο MODERATE |
| FG-OGTT | ||||||||||
| 4 | RCTs | Seriousb | No serious | No serious | No serious | No serious | 339 | 351 | MD 2.64 lower [4.12 to 1.17 lower] | ⨁⨁⨁Ο MODERATE |
| 1 h-OGTT | ||||||||||
| 4 | RCTs | Seriousb | No serious | No serious | No serious | No serious | 339 | 351 | MD 7.47 lower [12.24 to 2.31 lower] | ⨁⨁ΟΟ LOW |
| 2 h-OGTT | ||||||||||
| 4 | RCTs | Seriousb | Serious2 | No serious | No serious | No serious | 339 | 351 | MD 10.51 lower [16.88 to 4.14 lower] | ⨁⨁ΟΟ LOW |
| Gestational hypertension | ||||||||||
| 4 | RCTs | Seriousb | No serious | No serious | No serious | No serious | 9/339 | 35/351 | OR 0.26 [0.13 to 0.56] | ⨁⨁⨁Ο MODERATE |
| Preterm labor | ||||||||||
| 3 | RCTs | Seriousb | No serious | No serious | Seriousd | No serious | 7/229 | 21/238 | OR 0.33 [0.14 to 0.81] | ⨁⨁ΟΟ LOW |
| Cesarean section rate | ||||||||||
| 3 | RCTs | Seriousb | No serious | No serious | Seriousd | No serious | 97/229 | 116/238 | OR 0.77 [0.53 to 1.12] | ⨁⨁ΟΟ LOW |
| Macrosomia | ||||||||||
| 3 | RCTs | Seriousb | No serious | No serious | Seriousd | No serious | 8/229 | 12/238 | OR 0.74 [0.28 to 1.95] | ⨁⨁ΟΟ LOW |
| Neonatal hypoglycemia | ||||||||||
| 2 | RCTs | Seriousb | No serious | No serious | Very seriousd | No serious | 0/202 | 2/209 | OR 0.34 [0.04 to 3.32] | ⨁ΟΟΟ VERY LOW |
| NICU admission | ||||||||||
| 3 | RCTs | Seriousb | No serious | No serious | Seriousd | No serious | 3/229 | 11/238 | OR 0.36 [0.10 to 1.32] | ⨁⨁ΟΟ LOW |
| Shoulder dystocia | ||||||||||
| 3 | RCTs | Seriousb | No serious | No serious | Very seriousd | No serious | 1/229 | 2/238 | OR 0.64 [0.08 to 5.25] | ⨁ΟΟΟ VERY LOW |
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect
Moderate quality: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different
Low quality: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: The true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect
Very low quality: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect
CI confidence interval, OR odds ratio, OGTT oral glucose tolerance test, NICU neonatal intensive care unit admission
aThe risk in the intervention group [and its 95% confidence interval] is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention [and its 95% CI]
bStudies at high risk of bias
cSevere unexplained heterogeneity
dWide confidence interval [CI] crossing the line of no effect
eSmall sample size and/or few events
Summary of findings for the main comparison. Myoinositol supplementation compared to placebo for gestational diabetes mellitus and health outcomes
| Summary of findings |
|---|
| Myoinositol compared to Placebo for gestational diabetes prevention |
| Patient or population: overweight and obese Pregnant women at increased risk of gestational diabetes |
| Setting: trials were carried from 1980s to 2021 in countries from Italy, Iran |
| Intervention: Myoinositol |
| Comparison: Placebo |
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect
Moderate quality: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different
Low quality: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: The true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect
Very low quality: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect
CI confidence interval, OR odds ratio, OGTT oral glucose tolerance test NICU neonatal intensive care unit admission
aThe risk in the intervention group [and its 95% confidence interval] is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention [and its 95% CI]