Authors: W Ricart J López J Mozas A Pericot M A Sancho N González M Balsells R Luna A Cortázar P Navarro O Ramírez B Flández L F Pallardo A Hernández J Ampudia J M FernándezReal R Corcoy Spanish Group for the Study of the Impact of Carpenter and Coustan GDM thresholds
Publish Date: 2005/05/12
Volume: 48, Issue: 6, Pages: 1135-1141
Abstract
Pregnant women were assigned to one of four categories negative screenees falsepositive screenees ADAonlyGDM untreated and GDM according to National Diabetes Data Group NDDG criteria treated Fetal macrosomia and Caesarean section were defined as primary outcomes with seven additional secondary outcomesOf 9270 pregnant women screened for GDM 819 88 met NDDG criteria If the threshold for defining GDM had been lowered to ADA criteria an additional 28 of women would have been defined as having the condition relative increase of 318 Maternal characteristics of women with ADAonlyGDM were between those of falsepositive screenees and women with NDDGGDM The risk of diabetesassociated complications was slightly elevated in the individuals who would have been classified as abnormal only after the adoption of ADA criteria In addition the ADAonlyGDM contribution to morbidity was lower than that of other variables especially BMIUse of the ADA criteria to identify GDM would result in a 318 increase in prevalence compared with NDDG criteria However as the contribution of these additionally diagnosed cases to adverse GDM outcomes is not substantial a change in diagnostic criteria is not warranted in our setting
Keywords: