New diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus and their impact on the number of diagnoses and pregnancy outcomes
- PMID: 29167927
- PMCID: PMC6449063
- DOI: 10.1007/s00125-017-4506-x
New diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus and their impact on the number of diagnoses and pregnancy outcomes
Abstract
Aims/hypothesis: Detection and management of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are crucial to reduce the risk of pregnancy-related complications for both mother and child. In 2013, the WHO adopted new diagnostic criteria for GDM to improve pregnancy outcomes. However, the evidence supporting these criteria is limited. Consequently, these new criteria have not yet been endorsed in the Netherlands. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of these criteria on the number of GDM diagnoses and pregnancy outcomes.
Methods: Data were available from 10,642 women who underwent a 75 g OGTT because of risk factors or signs suggestive of GDM. Women were treated if diagnosed with GDM according to the WHO 1999 criteria. Data on pregnancy outcomes were obtained from extensive chart reviews from 4,431 women and were compared between women with normal glucose tolerance (NGT) and women classified into the following groups: (1) GDM according to WHO 1999 criteria; (2) GDM according to WHO 2013 criteria; (3) GDM according to WHO 2013 fasting glucose threshold, but not WHO 1999 criteria; and (4) GDM according to WHO 1999 2 h plasma glucose threshold (2HG), but not WHO 2013 criteria.
Results: Applying the new WHO 2013 criteria would have increased the number of diagnoses by 45% (32% vs 22%) in this population of women at higher risk for GDM. In comparison with women with NGT, women classified as having GDM based only on the WHO 2013 threshold for fasting glucose, who were not treated for GDM, were more likely to have been obese (46.1% vs 28.1%, p < 0.001) and hypertensive (3.3% vs 1.2%, p < 0.001) before pregnancy, and to have had higher rates of gestational hypertension (7.8% vs 4.9%, p = 0.003), planned Caesarean section (10.3% vs 6.5%, p = 0.001) and induction of labour (34.8% vs 28.0%, p = 0.001). In addition, their neonates were more likely to have had an Apgar score <7 at 5 min (4.4% vs 2.6%, p = 0.015) and to have been admitted to the Neonatology Department (15.0% vs 11.1%, p = 0.004). The number of large for gestational age (LGA) neonates was not significantly different between the two groups. Women potentially missed owing to the higher 2HG threshold set by WHO 2013 had similar pregnancy outcomes to women with NGT. These women were all treated for GDM with diet and 20.5% received additional insulin.
Conclusions/interpretation: Applying the WHO 2013 criteria will have a major impact on the number of GDM diagnoses. Using the fasting glucose threshold set by WHO 2013 identifies a group of women with an increased risk of adverse outcomes compared with women with NGT. We therefore support the use of a lower fasting glucose threshold in the Dutch national guideline for GDM diagnosis. However, adopting the WHO 2013 criteria with a higher 2HG threshold would exclude women in whom treatment for GDM seems to be effective.
Keywords: Diagnosis; Diagnostic criteria; GDM; Gestational diabetes mellitus; Pregnancy; Pregnancy outcomes; WHO.
Conflict of interest statement
Data availability
The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available. The dataset contains clinical data which, because of the Dutch law for Personal Data Protection and patient confidentiality, cannot be shared publicly. Patients did not sign informed consent to release their data on an individual basis on the internet, but data are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Duality of interest
The authors declare that there is no duality of interest associated with this manuscript.
Contribution statement
SHK and AWK analysed the data and drafted the manuscript. All authors qualify for authorship according to International Committee of Medical Journal Editors criteria. They have all contributed to the conception and design of the study, the interpretation of the data, the critical revision of the article for important intellectual content and the final approval of the version to be published. SHK and BHRW are the guarantors of this work.
Comment in
-
Insights uncovered from experiencing a rise in the incidence of gestational diabetes at a Melbourne hospital.Diabetologia. 2018 Aug;61(8):1881-1883. doi: 10.1007/s00125-018-4631-1. Epub 2018 Apr 27. Diabetologia. 2018. PMID: 29704118 No abstract available.
-
Medicalising pregnancy with new diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus: do we need more evidence? Reply to Venkataraman H and Saravanan P [letter].Diabetologia. 2018 Aug;61(8):1889-1891. doi: 10.1007/s00125-018-4665-4. Epub 2018 Jun 20. Diabetologia. 2018. PMID: 29922858 No abstract available.
-
Insights uncovered from experiencing a rise in the incidence of gestational diabetes at a Melbourne hospital. Reply to Ng E, Neff M, Sztal-Mazer S [letter].Diabetologia. 2018 Aug;61(8):1884-1885. doi: 10.1007/s00125-018-4667-2. Epub 2018 Jun 21. Diabetologia. 2018. PMID: 29931413 No abstract available.
-
Medicalising pregnancy with new diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus: do we need more evidence?Diabetologia. 2018 Aug;61(8):1886-1888. doi: 10.1007/s00125-018-4666-3. Epub 2018 Jun 23. Diabetologia. 2018. PMID: 29936537 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Heterogeneity of pregnancy outcomes and risk of LGA neonates in Caucasian females according to IADPSG criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus.Diabetes Metab. 2013 Apr;39(2):132-8. doi: 10.1016/j.diabet.2012.09.006. Epub 2012 Nov 22. Diabetes Metab. 2013. PMID: 23182459
-
The impact of adoption of the international association of diabetes in pregnancy study group criteria for the screening and diagnosis of gestational diabetes.Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Feb;212(2):224.e1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.08.027. Epub 2014 Aug 27. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015. PMID: 25173183
-
Comparison of adverse pregnancy outcomes based on the new IADPSG 2010 gestational diabetes criteria and maternal body mass index.Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2017 Oct;57(5):533-539. doi: 10.1111/ajo.12628. Epub 2017 Apr 19. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2017. PMID: 28421604
-
[Gestational diabetes mellitus (Update 2019)].Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2019 May;131(Suppl 1):91-102. doi: 10.1007/s00508-018-1419-8. Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2019. PMID: 30980150 Review. German.
-
Are women positive for the One Step but negative for the Two Step screening tests for gestational diabetes at higher risk for adverse outcomes?Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2018 Feb;97(2):122-134. doi: 10.1111/aogs.13254. Epub 2017 Dec 12. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2018. PMID: 29091257 Review.
Cited by
-
National and regional prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus in India: a systematic review and Meta-analysis.BMC Public Health. 2024 Feb 20;24(1):527. doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-18024-9. BMC Public Health. 2024. PMID: 38378536 Free PMC article.
-
Positive association between circulating Caveolin-1 and microalbuminuria in overt diabetes mellitus in pregnancy.J Endocrinol Invest. 2024 Jan;47(1):201-212. doi: 10.1007/s40618-023-02137-w. Epub 2023 Jun 26. J Endocrinol Invest. 2024. PMID: 37358699
-
Establishment and validation of a predictive nomogram for gestational diabetes mellitus during early pregnancy term: A retrospective study.Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2023 Feb 24;14:1087994. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1087994. eCollection 2023. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2023. PMID: 36909340 Free PMC article.
-
Evolution of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus across Continents in 21st Century.Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Nov 28;19(23):15804. doi: 10.3390/ijerph192315804. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022. PMID: 36497880 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Rural healthcare delivery and maternal and infant outcomes for diabetes in pregnancy: A systematic review.Nutr Diet. 2022 Feb;79(1):48-58. doi: 10.1111/1747-0080.12722. Epub 2022 Feb 6. Nutr Diet. 2022. PMID: 35128769 Free PMC article. Review.
References
-
- Langer O, Yogev Y, Most O, Xenakis EM. Gestational diabetes: the consequences of not treating. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192:989–997. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
