• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

妊娠期糖尿病女性的治疗方式是否会影响动脉僵硬度的测量?

Does treatment modality affect measures of arterial stiffness in women with gestational diabetes?

机构信息

Maternal and Fetal Medicine Unit, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK.

University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.

出版信息

Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2023 Sep;62(3):422-429. doi: 10.1002/uog.26234.

DOI:10.1002/uog.26234
PMID:37099764
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether arterial stiffness (AS) differs between healthy women and women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) managed by different treatment modalities.

METHODS

This was a prospective longitudinal cohort study comparing AS in pregnancies complicated by GDM and low-risk controls. AS was assessed by recording aortic pulse-wave velocity (AoPWV), brachial augmentation index (BrAIx) and aortic augmentation index (AoAIx) using the Arteriograph® at four gestational-age windows: 24 + 0 to 27 + 6 weeks (W1); 28 + 0 to 31 + 6 weeks (W2); 32 + 0 to 35 + 6 weeks (W3) and ≥ 36 + 0 weeks (W4). Women with GDM were considered both as a single group and as subgroups stratified by treatment modality. Data were analyzed using a linear mixed model on each AS variable (log-transformed) with group, gestational-age window, maternal age, ethnicity, parity, body mass index, mean arterial pressure and heart rate as fixed effects and individual as a random effect. We compared the group means including relevant contrasts and adjusted the P-values using Bonferroni correction.

RESULTS

The study population comprised 155 low-risk controls and 127 women with GDM, of whom 59 were treated with dietary intervention, 47 were treated with metformin only and 21 were treated with metformin + insulin. The two-way interaction term of study group and gestational age was significant for BrAIx and AoAIx (P < 0.001), but there was no evidence that mean AoPWV was different between the study groups (P = 0.729). Women in the control group demonstrated significantly lower BrAIx and AoAIx compared with the combined GDM group at W1-W3, but not at W4. The mean difference in log-transformed BrAIx was -0.37 (95% CI, -0.52 to -0.22), -0.23 (95% CI, -0.35 to -0.12) and -0.29 (95% CI, -0.40 to -0.18) at W1, W2 and W3, respectively. The mean difference in log-transformed AoAIx was -0.49 (95% CI, -0.69 to -0.30), -0.32 (95% CI, -0.47 to -0.18) and -0.38 (95% CI -0.52 to -0.24) at W1, W2 and W3, respectively. Similarly, women in the control group also demonstrated significantly lower BrAIx and AoAIx compared with each of the GDM treatment subgroups (diet, metformin only and metformin + insulin) at W1-W3. The increase in mean BrAIx and AoAIx seen between W2 and W3 in women with GDM treated with dietary management was attenuated in the metformin-only and metformin + insulin groups. However, the mean differences in BrAIx and AoAIx between these treatment groups were not statistically significant at any gestational-age window.

CONCLUSIONS

Pregnancies complicated by GDM demonstrate significantly higher AS compared with low-risk pregnancies regardless of treatment modality. Our data provide the basis for further investigation into the association of metformin therapy with changes in AS and risk of placenta-mediated diseases. © 2023 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

摘要

目的

探讨不同治疗方式管理的妊娠期糖尿病(GDM)孕妇与健康孕妇的动脉僵硬度(AS)是否存在差异。

方法

这是一项前瞻性纵向队列研究,比较了 GDM 合并妊娠和低危对照组的 AS。使用 Arteriograph® 在四个妊娠龄窗口记录主动脉脉搏波速度(AoPWV)、肱动脉增强指数(BrAIx)和主动脉增强指数(AoAIx):24+0 至 27+6 周(W1);28+0 至 31+6 周(W2);32+0 至 35+6 周(W3)和≥36+0 周(W4)。GDM 孕妇按单一组和治疗方式分层的亚组进行比较。使用线性混合模型对每个 AS 变量(对数转换)进行分析,组、妊娠龄窗口、母亲年龄、种族、产次、体重指数、平均动脉压和心率为固定效应,个体为随机效应。我们比较了组平均值,包括相关对比,并使用 Bonferroni 校正调整 P 值。

结果

研究人群包括 155 名低危对照组和 127 名 GDM 孕妇,其中 59 名接受饮食干预,47 名仅接受二甲双胍治疗,21 名接受二甲双胍+胰岛素治疗。研究组和妊娠龄的双向交互作用在 BrAIx 和 AoAIx 方面具有统计学意义(P<0.001),但在研究组之间没有证据表明平均 AoPWV 存在差异(P=0.729)。与 GDM 组相比,对照组在 W1-W3 时的 BrAIx 和 AoAIx 显著降低,但在 W4 时则不然。对数转换的 BrAIx 平均值差异分别为-0.37(95%CI,-0.52 至-0.22)、-0.23(95%CI,-0.35 至-0.12)和-0.29(95%CI,-0.40 至-0.18)。对数转换的 AoAIx 平均值差异分别为-0.49(95%CI,-0.69 至-0.30)、-0.32(95%CI,-0.47 至-0.18)和-0.38(95%CI,-0.52 至-0.24)。同样,与对照组相比,GDM 各治疗亚组(饮食、仅二甲双胍和二甲双胍+胰岛素)的 W1-W3 时的 BrAIx 和 AoAIx 也明显较低。在接受饮食管理的 GDM 孕妇中,W2 至 W3 期间 BrAIx 和 AoAIx 的平均值增加幅度在接受二甲双胍治疗的孕妇中减弱。然而,在任何妊娠龄窗口,这些治疗组之间的 BrAIx 和 AoAIx 平均值差异均无统计学意义。

结论

无论治疗方式如何,患有 GDM 的妊娠均表现出明显更高的 AS。我们的数据为进一步研究二甲双胍治疗与 AS 变化和胎盘介导疾病风险之间的关系提供了依据。©2023 作者。约翰威立父子公司出版超声在妇产科由国际妇产科超声学会。

相似文献

1
Does treatment modality affect measures of arterial stiffness in women with gestational diabetes?妊娠期糖尿病女性的治疗方式是否会影响动脉僵硬度的测量?
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2023 Sep;62(3):422-429. doi: 10.1002/uog.26234.
2
Maternal hemodynamics and neonatal birth weight in pregnancies complicated by gestational diabetes: new insights from novel causal inference analysis modeling.妊娠合并糖尿病孕妇的母体血液动力学与新生儿出生体重:新型因果推理分析模型的新见解。
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2022 Aug;60(2):215-222. doi: 10.1002/uog.24864.
3
The effects of metformin on maternal haemodynamics in gestational diabetes mellitus: A pilot study.二甲双胍对妊娠期糖尿病患者母体血液动力学的影响:一项初步研究。
Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2018 May;139:170-178. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2018.03.003. Epub 2018 Mar 7.
4
Arterial stiffness throughout pregnancy: Arteriograph device-specific reference ranges based on a low-risk population.妊娠期动脉僵硬度:基于低危人群的特定动脉造影设备参考范围。
J Hypertens. 2022 May 1;40(5):870-877. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000003086. Epub 2022 Feb 14.
5
Vascular phenotype at 35-37 weeks' gestation in women with gestational diabetes mellitus.35-37 孕周妊娠期糖尿病女性的血管表型。
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2023 Mar;61(3):386-391. doi: 10.1002/uog.26077.
6
Do maternal haemodynamics have a causal influence on treatment for gestational diabetes?母体血流动力学对妊娠期糖尿病的治疗有因果影响吗?
J Obstet Gynaecol. 2024 Dec;44(1):2307883. doi: 10.1080/01443615.2024.2307883. Epub 2024 Feb 22.
7
Gestational diabetes mellitus: relationship of adverse outcomes with severity of disease.妊娠期糖尿病:疾病严重程度与不良结局的关系。
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2024 Dec;37(1):2356031. doi: 10.1080/14767058.2024.2356031. Epub 2024 Jun 6.
8
Neonatal, infant, and childhood growth following metformin versus insulin treatment for gestational diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.二甲双胍与胰岛素治疗妊娠期糖尿病对新生儿、婴儿和儿童生长的影响:系统评价和荟萃分析。
PLoS Med. 2019 Aug 6;16(8):e1002848. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002848. eCollection 2019 Aug.
9
Maternal vascular indices and hemodynamic parameters at 36 weeks' gestation in gestational and pre-existing diabetes mellitus.母体血管指数和 36 孕周妊娠和原有糖尿病的血液动力学参数。
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2024 Nov;64(5):597-603. doi: 10.1002/uog.29119. Epub 2024 Oct 3.
10
Insulin for the treatment of women with gestational diabetes.用于治疗妊娠期糖尿病女性的胰岛素。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Nov 5;11(11):CD012037. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012037.pub2.

引用本文的文献

1
Arterial stiffness in women with gestational diabetes mellitus in pregnancy and postpartum.妊娠期和产后妊娠糖尿病女性的动脉僵硬度
Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2025 Aug 21. doi: 10.1007/s00508-025-02581-z.
2
Influence of gestational diabetes mellitus on the cardiovascular system and its underlying mechanisms.妊娠期糖尿病对心血管系统的影响及其潜在机制。
Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2025 May 16;16:1474643. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2025.1474643. eCollection 2025.