Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Women and Baby, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Department of Endocrinology, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Diabetes Obes Metab. 2018 Aug;20(8):1894-1902. doi: 10.1111/dom.13310. Epub 2018 May 8.
Diabetes is associated with a high risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. Optimal glycaemic control is fundamental and is traditionally monitored with self-measured glucose profiles and periodic HbA1c measurements. We investigated the effectiveness of additional use of retrospective continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in diabetic pregnancies.
We performed a nationwide multicentre, open label, randomized, controlled trial to study pregnant women with type 1 or type 2 diabetes who were undergoing insulin therapy at gestational age < 16 weeks, or women who were undergoing insulin treatment for gestational diabetes at gestational age < 30 weeks. Women were randomly allocated (1:1) to intermittent use of retrospective CGM or to standard treatment. Glycaemic control was assessed by CGM for 5-7 days every 6 weeks in the CGM group, while self-monitoring of blood glucose and HbA1c measurements were applied in both groups. Primary outcome was macrosomia, defined as birth weight above the 90th percentile. Secondary outcomes were glycaemic control and maternal and neonatal complications.
Between July 2011 and September 2015, we randomized 300 pregnant women with type 1 (n = 109), type 2 (n = 82) or with gestational (n = 109) diabetes to either CGM (n = 147) or standard treatment (n = 153). The incidence of macrosomia was 31.0% in the CGM group and 28.4% in the standard treatment group (relative risk [RR], 1.06; 95% CI, 0.83-1.37). HbA1c levels were similar between treatment groups.
In diabetic pregnancy, use of intermittent retrospective CGM did not reduce the risk of macrosomia. CGM provides detailed information concerning glycaemic fluctuations but, as a treatment strategy, does not translate into improved pregnancy outcome.
糖尿病与不良妊娠结局的风险增加有关。最佳血糖控制至关重要,传统上通过自我监测血糖谱和定期 HbA1c 测量来监测。我们研究了在糖尿病妊娠中额外使用回顾性连续血糖监测(CGM)的效果。
我们进行了一项全国性的多中心、开放标签、随机、对照试验,研究了在妊娠 16 周前接受胰岛素治疗的 1 型或 2 型糖尿病孕妇,或在妊娠 30 周前接受胰岛素治疗的妊娠期糖尿病孕妇。这些孕妇被随机分配(1:1)接受间歇性回顾性 CGM 或标准治疗。CGM 组每 6 周进行 5-7 天的 CGM 血糖监测,而两组均进行自我监测血糖和 HbA1c 测量。主要结局是巨大儿,定义为出生体重高于第 90 百分位。次要结局是血糖控制以及母婴并发症。
在 2011 年 7 月至 2015 年 9 月期间,我们随机将 300 名患有 1 型(n=109)、2 型(n=82)或妊娠期(n=109)糖尿病的孕妇分为 CGM 组(n=147)或标准治疗组(n=153)。CGM 组巨大儿的发生率为 31.0%,标准治疗组为 28.4%(相对风险 [RR],1.06;95%CI,0.83-1.37)。两组的 HbA1c 水平相似。
在糖尿病妊娠中,间歇性回顾性 CGM 的使用并不能降低巨大儿的风险。CGM 提供了有关血糖波动的详细信息,但作为一种治疗策略,并没有转化为改善妊娠结局。