The Relationship Between Maternal Glycemia and Perinatal Outcome

OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between varying degrees of maternal hyperglycemia and pregnancy outcomes. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a treatment trial for mild gestational diabetes including four cohorts: 1) 473 women with untreated mild gestational diabetes; 2) 256 women with a positive 50-g screen and one abnormal oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) value; 3) 675 women with a positive screen and no abnormal OGTT values; and 4) 437 women with a normal 50-g screen. Groups were compared by test of trend for a composite perinatal outcome (neonatal hypoglycemia, hyperbilirubinemia, elevated cord C-peptide level, and perinatal trauma or death), frequency of large for gestational age neonates, shoulder dystocia, and pregnancy-related hypertension. Three-hour OGTT levels (fasting, 1-, 2-, and 3-hour) levels were divided into categories and analyzed for their relationship to perinatal and maternal outcomes. RESULTS: There were significant trends by glycemic status among the four cohorts for the composite and all other outcomes (P<.001). Analysis for trend according to OGTT categories showed an increasing relationship between fasting and all postload levels and the various outcomes (P<.05). Fasting glucose 90 mg/dL or greater and 1 hour 165 mg/dL or greater were associated with an increased risk for the composite outcome (odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals of 2.0 [1.03-4.15] and 1.46 [1.02-2.11] to 1.52 [1.08-2.15] for the fasting and 1 hour, respectively). A 1 hour glucose 150 mg/dL or greater was associated with an increased risk for large for gestational age (odds ratios, 1.8 [1.02-3.18] to 2.35 [1.35-4.14]); however, 2- and 3-hour glucose levels did not increase the risk for the composite or large for gestational age until well beyond current gestational diabetes diagnostic thresholds. CONCLUSION: A monotonic relationship exists between increasing maternal glycemia and perinatal morbidity. Current OGTT criteria require reevaluation in determining thresholds for the diagnosis and treatment of gestational diabetes. (Obstet Gynecol 2011;117:218-24) DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e318203ebe0