Birth weight classification in gestational diabetes: is there an ideal chart?

Introduction: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated to increased rates of large for gestational age newborns and macrosomia. Several charts are used to classify birth weight. Is there an ideal chart to classify newborns of GDM mothers?Methods: We evaluated adequacy of birth weight of 332 neonates born to GDM mothers at Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Brazil. Newborns were classified according to gestational age as small (SGA), adequate or large (LGA) based on four charts: Alexander, Pedreira, INTERGROWTH 21st Project and SINASC-2012. The latter was built using data from a large national registry of 2012, the Born Alive National Surveillance System (Sistema de Informações de Nascidos Vivos – SINASC), which included 2.905,789 birth certificates. Frequencies of SGA and LGA and Kappa agreement were calculated.Results: In non-gender adjusted curves, SGA rates (95% confidence interval) varied from 8% (5-11) to 9% (6-13); LGA rates, from 11% (8-15) to 17% (13-21). For males, SGA rates varied from 3% (1-6%) to 6% (3-11%), and LGA rates, from 18% (13-24%) to 31% (24-38%); for female, SGA rates were from 3% (1-7%) to 10% (6-16%) and LGA rates, from 11% (6-16%) to 19% (13-26%). Kappa results were: ALEXANDER vs. SINASC-2012: 0.80 (0.73-0.88); INTERGROWTH 21st vs. SINASC-2012 (adjusted by sex): 0.62 (0.53-0.71); INTERGROWTH 21st vs. PEDREIRA: 0.71 (0.62-0.79); SINASC-2012 (by sex) vs. PEDREIRA: 0.86 (0.79-0.93).Conclusions: Misclassification has to be taken into account when evaluating newborns of GDM mothers, as LGA rates can almost double depending on the chart used to classify birth weight

Birth weight classification in gestational diabetes: is there an ideal chart?

Introduction: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated to increased rates of large for gestational age newborns and macrosomia. Several charts are used to classify birth weight. Is there an ideal chart to classify newborns of GDM mothers? Methods: We evaluated adequacy of birth weight of 332 neonates born to GDM mothers at Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Brazil. Newborns were classified according to gestational age as small (SGA), adequate or large (LGA) based on four charts: Alexander, Pedreira, INTERGROWTH 21st Project and SINASC-2012. The latter was built using data from a large national registry of 2012, the Born Alive National Surveillance System (Sistema de Informações de Nascidos Vivos – SINASC), which included 2.905,789 birth certificates. Frequencies of SGA and LGA and Kappa agreement were calculated. Results: In non-gender adjusted curves, SGA rates (95% confidence interval) varied from 8% (5-11) to 9% (6-13); LGA rates, from 11% (8-15) to 17% (13-21). For males, SGA rates varied from 3% (1-6%) to 6% (3-11%), and LGA rates, from 18% (13-24%) to 31% (24-38%); for female, SGA rates were from 3% (1-7%) to 10% (6-16%) and LGA rates, from 11% (6-16%) to 19% (13-26%). Kappa results were: ALEXANDER vs. SINASC-2012: 0.80 (0.73-0.88); INTERGROWTH 21st vs. SINASC-2012 (adjusted by sex): 0.62 (0.53-0.71); INTERGROWTH 21st vs. PEDREIRA: 0.71 (0.62-0.79); SINASC-2012 (by sex) vs. PEDREIRA: 0.86 (0.79-0.93). Conclusions: Misclassification has to be taken into account when evaluating newborns of GDM mothers, as LGA rates can almost double depending on the chart used to classify birth weight

Clinical characteristics of women with gestational diabetes - comparison of two cohorts enrolled 20 years apart in southern Brazil

<div><p>ABSTRACT CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: The prevalence and characteristics of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) have changed over time, reflecting the nutritional transition and changes in diagnostic criteria. We aimed to evaluate characteristics of women with GDM over a 20-year interval. DESIGN AND SETTING: Comparison of two pregnancy cohorts enrolled in different periods, in university hospitals in Porto Alegre, Brazil: 1991 to 1993 (n = 216); and 2009 to 2013 (n = 375). METHODS: We applied two diagnostic criteria to the cohorts: International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG)/World Health Organization (WHO); and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). We compared maternal-fetal characteristics and outcomes between the cohorts and within each cohort. RESULTS: The women in the 2010s cohort were older (31 ± 7 versus 30 ± 6 years), more frequently obese (29.4% versus 15.2%), with more hypertensive disorders (14.1% versus 5.6%) and at increased risk of cesarean section (adjusted relative risk 1.8; 95% confidence interval: 1.4 - 2.3), compared with those in the 1990s cohort. Neonatal outcomes such as birth weight category and hypoglycemia were similar. In the 1990s cohort, women only fulfilling IADPSG/WHO or only fulfilling NICE criteria had similar characteristics and outcomes; in the 2010s cohort, women only diagnosed through IADPSG/WHO were more frequently obese than those diagnosed only through NICE (33 ± 8 kg/m2 versus 28 ± 6 kg/m2; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The epidemic of obesity seems to have modified the profile of women with GDM. Despite similar neonatal outcomes, there were differences in the intensity of treatment over time. The IADPSG/WHO criteria seemed to identify a profile more associated with obesity.</p></div