Skip to main content
Erschienen in: The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India 3/2017

22.11.2016 | Original Article

Comparison of One-Step Versus Two-Step Screening for Diagnosis of GDM in Indian Population: A Randomized Controlled Trial

verfasst von: Mohit Satodiya, Navneet Takkar, Poonam Goel, Jasbinder Kaur

Erschienen in: The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India | Ausgabe 3/2017

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objective

To compare the incidence, maternal and fetal outcomes of gestational diabetes mellitus using one step versus two steps as a screening procedure.

Methodology

A prospective randomized trial involving screening of 1000 pregnant women for gestational diabetes mellitus was conducted. Women were divided in two groups (500 each). Group A comprised of patients screened with two-step approach (ACOG recommendation), and group B comprised of women screened by one-step method (IADPSG criteria). Women diagnosed with ‘gestational diabetes’ were followed in an antenatal clinic, and incidence of GDM and maternal and fetal outcome between two groups were analyzed using SPSS.

Results

The incidence of GDM was almost double using one-step versus two-step approach which was 19.2 and 11.8%, respectively. Maternal outcomes were comparable in both the groups except the risk of preterm delivery which was 2.5 times more in group A than group B (odds ratio = 2.43 95% CI 1.01–5.79). Further, fetal outcomes were also comparable except neonatal hypoglycemia which was seen in 29.31% in group A versus 7.4% in group B. In the group B, 15 patients (15.8%) with GDM (based on FBS ≥ 92 mg/dl at first ANC visit) showed clinical symptoms and blood sugars in hypoglycemic range on MNT requiring resumption of normal diet.

Conclusion

The incidence of GDM using IADPSG criteria was almost double versus ACOG criteria. Maternal and fetal outcomes were comparable except in 15.8% women diagnosed as GDM (using FBS ≥ 92 mg/dl at first ANC visit as per IADPSG) and suffered from hypoglycemia. A large trial is being proposed before these criteria are adopted.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat American Diabetes Association. Diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus (position statement). Diabetes Care. 2009;32:S62–7.CrossRefPubMedCentral American Diabetes Association. Diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus (position statement). Diabetes Care. 2009;32:S62–7.CrossRefPubMedCentral
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. Clinical management guidelines for obstetricians-gynecologist. Practice Bulletin No. 137 (Replaces Practice Bulletin Number 30, September 2001, Committee opinion Number 435, June 2009, and Committee Opinion Number 504, September 2011) American College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;2013(122):406–16. Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. Clinical management guidelines for obstetricians-gynecologist. Practice Bulletin No. 137 (Replaces Practice Bulletin Number 30, September 2001, Committee opinion Number 435, June 2009, and Committee Opinion Number 504, September 2011) American College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;2013(122):406–16.
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Alberti K, Zimmett P. Definition, diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus and its complications. Part 1: diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus provisional report of a WHO consultation. Diabetes Med. 1998;15:539–53.CrossRef Alberti K, Zimmett P. Definition, diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus and its complications. Part 1: diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus provisional report of a WHO consultation. Diabetes Med. 1998;15:539–53.CrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups Consensus Panel. International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups recommendations on the diagnosis and classification of hyperglycemia in pregnancy. Diabetes Care. 2010;33:676–82.CrossRefPubMedCentral International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups Consensus Panel. International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups recommendations on the diagnosis and classification of hyperglycemia in pregnancy. Diabetes Care. 2010;33:676–82.CrossRefPubMedCentral
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Metzger BE, Lowe LP, Dyer AR, et al. Hyperglycemia and adverse pregnancy outcomes. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:1991–2002.CrossRefPubMed Metzger BE, Lowe LP, Dyer AR, et al. Hyperglycemia and adverse pregnancy outcomes. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:1991–2002.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Seshiah V, Sahay BK, Das AK, et al. Gestational diabetes mellitus—Indian guidelines. J Indian Med Assoc. 2009;107:799–806.PubMed Seshiah V, Sahay BK, Das AK, et al. Gestational diabetes mellitus—Indian guidelines. J Indian Med Assoc. 2009;107:799–806.PubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Wahi P, Dogra V, Jandial K, et al. Prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and its outcomes in Jammu region. J Assoc Physicians India. 2011;59:227–30.PubMed Wahi P, Dogra V, Jandial K, et al. Prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and its outcomes in Jammu region. J Assoc Physicians India. 2011;59:227–30.PubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Agarwal MM, Dhatt GS, Shah SM. Gestational diabetes mellitus. Diabetic Care. 2010;33:2018–20.CrossRef Agarwal MM, Dhatt GS, Shah SM. Gestational diabetes mellitus. Diabetic Care. 2010;33:2018–20.CrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat 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;114:326–32.CrossRefPubMed 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;114:326–32.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Benhalima K, Hanssens M, Devlieger R, et al. Analysis of pregnancy outcomes using the new IADPSG recommendation compared with the Carpenter and Coustan criteria in an area with a low prevalence of gestational diabetes. Int J Endocrinol. 2013;2013:1–6.CrossRef Benhalima K, Hanssens M, Devlieger R, et al. Analysis of pregnancy outcomes using the new IADPSG recommendation compared with the Carpenter and Coustan criteria in an area with a low prevalence of gestational diabetes. Int J Endocrinol. 2013;2013:1–6.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Comparison of One-Step Versus Two-Step Screening for Diagnosis of GDM in Indian Population: A Randomized Controlled Trial
verfasst von
Mohit Satodiya
Navneet Takkar
Poonam Goel
Jasbinder Kaur
Publikationsdatum
22.11.2016
Verlag
Springer India
Erschienen in
The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India / Ausgabe 3/2017
Print ISSN: 0971-9202
Elektronische ISSN: 0975-6434
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13224-016-0955-2

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2017

The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India 3/2017 Zur Ausgabe

Invited Review Article

Can We Deliver Better?

Update Gynäkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.