Aims To assess the risk of adverse neonatal outcomes in women with gestational diabetes (GDM) by identifying subgroups of women at higher risk to recognize the characteristics most associated with an excess of risk. Methods Observational, retrospective, multicenter study involving consecutive women with GDM. To identify distinct and homogeneous subgroups of women at a higher risk, the RECursive Partitioning and AMalgamation (RECPAM) method was used. Overall, 2736 pregnancies complicated by GDM were analyzed. The main outcome measure was the occurrence of adverse neonatal outcomes in pregnancies complicated by GDM. Results Among study participants (median age 36.8 years, pre-gestational BMI 24.8 kg/m2), six miscarriages, one neonatal death, but no maternal death was recorded. The occurrence of the cumulative adverse outcome (OR 2.48, 95% CI 1.59–3.87), large for gestational age (OR 3.99, 95% CI 2.40–6.63), fetal malformation (OR 2.66, 95% CI 1.00–7.18), and respiratory distress (OR 4.33, 95% CI 1.33–14.12) was associated with previous macrosomia. Large for gestational age was also associated with obesity (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.00–2.15). Small for gestational age was associated with first trimester glucose levels (OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.04–3.69). Neonatal hypoglycemia was associated with overweight (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.02–2.27) and obesity (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.04–2.51). The RECPAM analysis identified high-risk subgroups mainly characterized by high pre-pregnancy BMI (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.21–2.33 for obese; OR 1.38 95% CI 1.03–1.87 for overweight). Conclusions A deep investigation on the factors associated with adverse neonatal outcomes requires a risk stratification. In particular, great attention must be paid to the prevention and treatment of obesity.

The risk stratification of adverse neonatal outcomes in women with gestational diabetes (STRONG) study

Vitacolonna E;
2018

Abstract

Aims To assess the risk of adverse neonatal outcomes in women with gestational diabetes (GDM) by identifying subgroups of women at higher risk to recognize the characteristics most associated with an excess of risk. Methods Observational, retrospective, multicenter study involving consecutive women with GDM. To identify distinct and homogeneous subgroups of women at a higher risk, the RECursive Partitioning and AMalgamation (RECPAM) method was used. Overall, 2736 pregnancies complicated by GDM were analyzed. The main outcome measure was the occurrence of adverse neonatal outcomes in pregnancies complicated by GDM. Results Among study participants (median age 36.8 years, pre-gestational BMI 24.8 kg/m2), six miscarriages, one neonatal death, but no maternal death was recorded. The occurrence of the cumulative adverse outcome (OR 2.48, 95% CI 1.59–3.87), large for gestational age (OR 3.99, 95% CI 2.40–6.63), fetal malformation (OR 2.66, 95% CI 1.00–7.18), and respiratory distress (OR 4.33, 95% CI 1.33–14.12) was associated with previous macrosomia. Large for gestational age was also associated with obesity (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.00–2.15). Small for gestational age was associated with first trimester glucose levels (OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.04–3.69). Neonatal hypoglycemia was associated with overweight (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.02–2.27) and obesity (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.04–2.51). The RECPAM analysis identified high-risk subgroups mainly characterized by high pre-pregnancy BMI (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.21–2.33 for obese; OR 1.38 95% CI 1.03–1.87 for overweight). Conclusions A deep investigation on the factors associated with adverse neonatal outcomes requires a risk stratification. In particular, great attention must be paid to the prevention and treatment of obesity.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Pintaudi B. STRONG on line 17.9.18.pdf

Solo gestori archivio

Tipologia: PDF editoriale
Dimensione 531.57 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
531.57 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11564/696277
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 18
  • Scopus 41
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 37
social impact