Suppr超能文献

与1型糖尿病多次皮下注射相比,持续皮下胰岛素输注尽管能更好地控制血糖,但与妊娠结局并无关联——妊娠计划和孕前糖化血红蛋白的意义。

Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion does not correspond with pregnancy outcomes despite better glycemic control as compared to multiple daily injections in type 1 diabetes - Significance of pregnancy planning and prepregnancy HbA1c.

作者信息

Żurawska-Kliś Monika, Kosiński Marcin, Kuchnicka Andżelika, Rurka Milena, Hałucha Judyta, Wójcik Marzena, Cypryk Katarzyna

机构信息

Department of Internal Diseases and Diabetology, Medical University of Lodz, Poland.

Department of Internal Diseases and Diabetology, Medical University of Lodz, Poland.

出版信息

Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2021 Feb;172:108628. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2020.108628. Epub 2020 Dec 22.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to compare pregnancy outcomes with glycemic control, total increase in insulin requirement, and body weight gain in the women with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus (T1DM) using continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) or multiple daily injections (MDI).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was a single center retrospective observational study involving 209 pregnant Caucasian women. Among the study participants, 95 subjects were treated with MDI and 114 patients were using CSII therapy. The primary outcomes were pregnancy results, while secondary ones were HbA1c, increase in daily dose of insulin (DDI), and body weight gain.

RESULTS

At baseline, the CSII users were older (P = 0.0373), they were diagnosed with T1DM at a younger age (P = 0.047), and more often planned pregnancy (P = 0.032). A majority of the women were classified as class D, according to the White classification. Among the CSII users, a significantly higher proportion of the subjects in class B was noted than in the MDI users, with no differences in the proportion of the remaining White classes. Prepregnancy HbA1c was insignificantly lower in the CSII group, however, a significantly higher proportion of the CSII users reached the target value of HbA1c (P = 0.008). A prepregnancy daily dose of insulin (both total and per kg of body weight), body weight, and body mass index (BMI) did not differ between the groups. The 1st and 2nd trimester HbA1c was lower among the CSII users (6.83 ± 1.38 vs 7.52 ± 2.11%, P = 0.01 and 6.17 ± 0.9 vs 6.57 ± 1.12%, P = 0.009, respectively), while the 3rd trimester HbA1c as well as the total change in HbA1c were comparable. Neither DDI and body weight in concecutive trimesters, nor their total gestational increase, differed between the groups. The rate of pregnancy loss, such as abortions, fetal and neonatal death did not differ between the groups. As regards composite pregnancy loss, prepregnancy HbA1c was 8.41%±2.81% among the MDI cohort vs 7.22%±1.31% in the CSII users (P = 0.517). No differences were found in the gestational age at delivery, the mode of delivery, neonatal birth weight, the rate of macrosomy, LGA or SGA. A higher Apgar score was noted among the CSII users (8.63 ± 1.63 vs 8.03 ± 2.49%, P = 0.047), however, the proportion of neonates with an Apgar score lower than 7 points was similar. In the women planning pregnancy, as compared to the subjects who did not, HbA1c was significantly lower in the 1st trimester, together with a significantly higher rate of the women achieving the target HbA1c value during planning as well as in the 1st trimester. In the group of women planning pregnancy, significantly lower 1st trimester HbA1c and composite outcome of pregnancy loss were observed in the CSII users vs the MDI treated women. Lack of pregnancy planning and a high HbA1c level in the 1st trimester were independent predictors of both LGA (OR = 4.99 [95%CI 1.12-21.0], P = 0.033 and OR = 3.02 [95%CI 1.19-7.65], P = 0.019, respectively) and macrosomia (OR = 8.43 [95%CI 1.36-51.93], P = 0.021 and OR = 5.47 [95%CI 1.77-16.87], P = 0.003, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The course of pregnancy and obstetric outcomes were not dependent on the mode of insulin delivery, but only on pregnancy planning and HbA1c in early pregnancy. Further studies are needed to explore more precise parameters describing both glycemic control in pregnant women as well as perinatal infant well-being.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在比较1型糖尿病(T1DM)女性患者采用持续皮下胰岛素输注(CSII)或多次皮下注射(MDI)时的妊娠结局、血糖控制情况、胰岛素需求总量增加情况以及体重增加情况。

材料与方法

这是一项单中心回顾性观察研究,涉及209名白人妊娠女性。在研究参与者中,95名受试者接受MDI治疗,114名患者采用CSII治疗。主要结局为妊娠结果,次要结局为糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)、每日胰岛素剂量增加量(DDI)和体重增加。

结果

基线时,CSII使用者年龄较大(P = 0.0373),诊断为T1DM时年龄较小(P = 0.047),且更常为计划妊娠(P = 0.032)。根据怀特分类,大多数女性被归类为D级。在CSII使用者中,B级受试者的比例显著高于MDI使用者,其余怀特分类的比例无差异。妊娠前CSII组的HbA1c略低,但达到HbA1c目标值的CSII使用者比例显著更高(P = 0.008)。两组间妊娠前每日胰岛素剂量(总量和每千克体重)、体重和体重指数(BMI)无差异。CSII使用者在孕早期和孕中期的HbA1c较低(分别为6.83±1.38% vs 7.52±2.11%,P = 0.01;6.17±0.9% vs 6.57±1.12%,P = 0.009),而孕晚期HbA1c以及HbA1c的总变化相当。两组间连续孕期的DDI和体重及其孕期总增加量无差异。流产、胎儿及新生儿死亡等妊娠丢失率在两组间无差异。关于复合妊娠丢失,MDI队列妊娠前HbA1c为8.41%±2.81%,CSII使用者为7.22%±1.31%(P = 0.517)。分娩孕周、分娩方式、新生儿出生体重、巨大儿、大于胎龄儿(LGA)或小于胎龄儿(SGA)发生率无差异。CSII使用者的阿氏评分较高(8.63±1.63 vs 8.03±2.49%,P = 0.047),但阿氏评分低于7分的新生儿比例相似。在计划妊娠的女性中,与未计划妊娠的受试者相比,孕早期HbA1c显著更低,且计划妊娠期间及孕早期达到HbA1c目标值的女性比例显著更高。在计划妊娠的女性组中,CSII使用者与接受MDI治疗的女性相比,孕早期HbA1c显著更低,复合妊娠丢失结局更好。未计划妊娠以及孕早期HbA1c水平高是LGA(OR = 4.99 [95%CI 1.12 - 21.0],P = 0.033和OR = 3.02 [95%CI 1.19 - 7.65],P = 0.019,分别)和巨大儿(OR = 8.43 [95%CI 1.36 - 51.93],P = 0.021和OR = 5.47 [95%CI 1.77 - 16.87],P = 0.003,分别)的独立预测因素。

结论

妊娠过程和产科结局不依赖于胰岛素给药方式,而仅取决于妊娠计划和孕早期的HbA1c。需要进一步研究以探索更精确的参数,用于描述孕妇血糖控制情况以及围产期婴儿健康状况。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验