Suppr超能文献

一步法与两步法筛查诊断伊朗人群妊娠期糖尿病:一项随机社区试验。

One-step versus two-step screening for diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus in Iranian population: A randomized community trial.

机构信息

Reproductive Endocrinology Research Center, Research Institute for Endocrine Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Non-Communicable Diseases Research Center, Endocrinology and Metabolism Population Sciences Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

出版信息

Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2023 Feb 2;13:1039643. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2022.1039643. eCollection 2022.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

There is considerable worldwide controversy regarding optimal screening and diagnostic approaches for GDM. This study aimed to compare the prevalence, maternal and neonatal outcomes of a One-step with a Two-step approach for the screening and diagnosis of GDM in a large community sample of pregnant women.

METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis of a randomized community non-inferiority trial of GDM screening in Iran. For the current study, all pregnant women who met the inclusion criteria were randomized into two groups for GDM screening. The first group of women (n = 14611) was screened by a One-step screening approach [75-g 2-h oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT)] and the second group (n = 14160) by a Two-step method (the 50-g glucose challenge test followed by the 100-g OGTT). All study participants were followed up until delivery, and the adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes were recorded in detail.

RESULTS

GDM was diagnosed in 9.3% of the pregnant women who were assigned to the One-step and in 5.4% of those assigned to the Two-step approach with a statistically significant difference between them (p < 0.001). Intention-to-treat analyses showed no significant differences between the One-step and the Two-step group in the unadjusted risks of the adverse pregnancy outcomes of macrosomia, primary cesarean-section, preterm birth, hypoglycemia, hypocalcemia, hyperbilirubinemia, preeclampsia, neonatal intensive care unit admission, birth trauma, low birth weight, and intrauterine fetal death. Results remained unchanged after adjustment for potential confounder variables including gestational age at enrollment and delivery, maternal body mass index, gestational weight gain, type of delivery, treatment modality, and GDM diagnosis in the first trimester.

CONCLUSION

We found that although the rates of GDM more than doubled with the One-step strategy, the One-step approach was similar to the Two-step approach in terms of maternal and neonatal outcomes. These findings may warn that more caution should be exercised in adopting the One-step method worldwide. Future research is needed to assess the long-term harm and benefits of those approaches to GDM screening for both mothers and their offspring.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://www.irct.ir/trial/518, identifier (IRCT138707081281N1).

摘要

目的

对于 GDM 的最佳筛查和诊断方法,全球存在较大争议。本研究旨在比较一步法和两步法筛查和诊断 GDM 在大型社区孕妇样本中的患病率、母婴结局。

方法

我们对伊朗一项 GDM 筛查的随机社区非劣效性试验进行了二次分析。对于本研究,符合纳入标准的所有孕妇均被随机分为两组进行 GDM 筛查。第一组(n = 14611)采用一步法(75g 2 小时口服葡萄糖耐量试验(OGTT))筛查,第二组(n = 14160)采用两步法(50g 葡萄糖筛查试验后行 100g OGTT)。所有研究参与者均随访至分娩,并详细记录母婴不良结局。

结果

一步法组 9.3%的孕妇被诊断为 GDM,两步法组 5.4%的孕妇被诊断为 GDM,两组间差异具有统计学意义(p<0.001)。意向治疗分析显示,一步法组与两步法组之间,巨大儿、初次剖宫产、早产、低血糖、低钙血症、高胆红素血症、子痫前期、新生儿重症监护病房入院、产伤、低出生体重和宫内胎儿死亡等不良妊娠结局的风险无显著差异。调整纳入时的孕周和分娩时的孕周、母亲 BMI、妊娠体重增加、分娩方式、治疗方式以及孕早期 GDM 诊断等潜在混杂变量后,结果仍保持不变。

结论

我们发现,虽然一步法策略使 GDM 的检出率增加了一倍以上,但一步法在母婴结局方面与两步法相似。这些发现可能表明,在全球范围内采用一步法时应更加谨慎。需要进一步研究来评估这些 GDM 筛查方法对母婴的长期危害和益处。

临床试验注册

https://www.irct.ir/trial/518,标识符(IRCT138707081281N1)。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e636/9932332/d29a6831413c/fendo-13-1039643-g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验