Glucose Testing in an Index Pregnancy and Outcomes in a Subsequent Pregnancy: Implications for Screening and a Novel Risk Calculator

Samantha de los Reyes; Lavisha Singh; Marci Adams; Chi Wang; Emmet Hirsch

doi:10.1055/s-0042-1758484

American Journal of Perinatology, Table of Contents

Am J Perinatol 2023; 40(03): 243-249
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1758484

SMFM Fellowship Series Article

Glucose Testing in an Index Pregnancy and Outcomes in a Subsequent Pregnancy: Implications for Screening and a Novel Risk Calculator

Samantha de los Reyes

¹Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, NorthShore University HealthSystem/University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois

,

Lavisha Singh

²Department of Statistics, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, Illinois

,

Marci Adams

³Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, Illinois

,

Chi Wang

²Department of Statistics, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, Illinois

,

Emmet Hirsch

⁴Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, NorthShore University HealthSystem/University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine, Evanston, Illinois

› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Objective Our objective was to assess whether variables from an index pregnancy (PG1) can be used to guide testing for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in a subsequent pregnancy (PG2) and to create a risk calculator for GDM in PG2.

Study Design This was a retrospective cohort study of patients delivering ≥2 singleton gestations at >24 weeks' gestation from June 2009 to December 2018, for whom results of a 1-hour glucose challenge test (GCT) were available from PG1. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to evaluate factors associated with GDM in PG2.

Results In total, 4,278 patients met the inclusion criteria. Among patients with a normal 1-hour GCT (<140 mg/dL) in PG1 (n = 3,719), 3.9% were diagnosed with GDM in PG2. In multivariable analysis of this group, GDM in PG2 was associated with higher GCT in PG1 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.04–1.06), large for gestational age neonate in PG1 (aOR: 1.97, 95% CI: 1.24–3.13), and higher BMI (aOR: 1.08, 95% CI: 1.05–1.11). A novel risk calculator for GDM in PG2 was developed based on these associations. Using a risk cut-off of 15%, the calculator had a positive predictive value of 26% and a negative predictive value of 97%, with 3.2% of patients identified as “at risk”. Among patients with abnormal 1-hour GCT in PG1, 38.3% (n = 214/559) had an abnormal 1-hour GCT in PG2 and 34.5% (n = 74/214) of these patients received a diagnosis of GDM.

Conclusion A normal 1-hour GCT in an PG1 is followed by GDM in a subsequent pregnancy in only 3.9% of cases. A novel calculator supports replacing universal screening with targeted testing in subsequent pregnancies in this population. Among patients with an abnormal 1-hour GCT in PG1, nearly 40% have an abnormal 1-hour GCT in a subsequent pregnancy. Direct diagnostic testing can be considered in such patients.

Key Points

Normal GCT in a first pregnancy is associated with normal GCT in subsequent pregnancy.
A risk calculator can target diabetes testing in a subsequent pregnancy.
Abnormal GCT in a first pregnancy is associated with abnormal GCT in subsequent pregnancy.

Keywords

gestational diabetes - universal testing - targeted testing

Full Text

References

References
1 Crowther CA, Hiller JE, Moss JR, McPhee AJ, Jeffries WS, Robinson JS. Australian Carbohydrate Intolerance Study in Pregnant Women (ACHOIS) Trial Group. Effect of treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus on pregnancy outcomes. N Engl J Med 2005; 352 (24) 2477-2486
2 Landon MB, Spong CY, Thom E. et al; Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. A multicenter, randomized trial of treatment for mild gestational diabetes. N Engl J Med 2009; 361 (14) 1339-1348
3 Bellamy L, Casas JP, Hingorani AD, Williams D. Type 2 diabetes mellitus after gestational diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2009; 373 (9677): 1773-1779
4 Kramer CK, Campbell S, Retnakaran R. Gestational diabetes and the risk of cardiovascular disease in women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetologia 2019; 62 (06) 905-914
5 Heida KY, Franx A, van Rijn BB. et al. Earlier age of onset of chronic hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus after a hypertensive disorder of pregnancy or gestational diabetes mellitus. Hypertension 2015; 66 (06) 1116-1122
6 ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 190: gestational diabetes mellitus. Obstet Gynecol 2018
7 American Diabetes Association. Classification and diagnosis of diabetes: standards of medical care in diabetes—2019. Diabetes Care 2019; 42 (suppl_1): S13-S28
8 Moyer VA. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for gestational diabetes mellitus: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2014; 160 (06) 414-420
9 Naylor CD, Sermer M, Chen E, Farine D. Toronto Trihospital Gestational Diabetes Project Investigators. Selective screening for gestational diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med 1997; 337 (22) 1591-1596
10 Miailhe G, Kayem G, Girard G, Legardeur H, Mandelbrot L. Selective rather than universal screening for gestational diabetes mellitus?. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2015; 191: 95-100
11 Tieu J, McPhee AJ, Crowther CA, Middleton P, Shepherd E. Screening for gestational diabetes mellitus based on different risk profiles and settings for improving maternal and infant health. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 8: CD007222
12 Bottalico JN. Recurrent gestational diabetes: risk factors, diagnosis, management, and implications. Semin Perinatol 2007; 31 (03) 176-184
13 Gaudier FL, Hauth JC, Poist M, Corbett D, Cliver SP. Recurrence of gestational diabetes mellitus. Obstet Gynecol 1992; 80 (05) 755-758
14 Cheng YW, Block-Kurbisch I, Caughey AB. Carpenter-Coustan criteria compared with the national diabetes data group thresholds for gestational diabetes mellitus. Obstet Gynecol 2009; 114 (2, pt. 1): 326-332
15 Flanagin A, Frey T, Christiansen SL, Bauchner H. The reporting of race and ethnicity in medical and science journals: comments invited. JAMA 2021; 325 (11) 1049-1052
16 Talge NM, Mudd LM, Sikorskii A, Basso O. United States birth weight reference corrected for implausible gestational age estimates. Pediatrics 2014; 133 (05) 844-853
17 Bendel RB, Afifi AA. Comparison of stopping rules in forward “stepwise” regression. J Am Stat Assoc 1977; 72 (357) 46-57
18 Mickey RM, Greenland S. The impact of confounder selection criteria on effect estimation. Am J Epidemiol 1989; 129 (01) 125-137
19 Caughey AB, Cheng YW, Stotland NE, Washington AE, Escobar GJ. Maternal and paternal race/ethnicity are both associated with gestational diabetes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010; 202 (06) 616.e1-616.e5
20 Solomon CG, Willett WC, Carey VJ. et al. A prospective study of pregravid determinants of gestational diabetes mellitus. JAMA 1997; 278 (13) 1078-1083
21 Kim C, Berger DK, Chamany S. Recurrence of gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review. Diabetes Care 2007; 30 (05) 1314-1319
22 Farrar D, Duley L, Dowswell T, Lawlor DA. Different strategies for diagnosing gestational diabetes to improve maternal and infant health. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 8: CD007122
23 Hillier TA, Pedula KL, Ogasawara KK. et al. A pragmatic, randomized clinical trial of gestational diabetes screening. N Engl J Med 2021; 384 (10) 895-904
24 Vandorsten JP, Dodson WC, Espeland MA. et al. NIH consensus development conference: diagnosing gestational diabetes mellitus. NIH Consens State Sci Statements 2013; 29 (01) 1-31

Supplementary Material

Supplementary Material