4.2 Review

A Low 50-gram, 1-hour Glucose Challenge Test Value Predicts Neonatal Birth Weight Less than the 10th Percentile: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PERINATOLOGY
Volume 38, Issue 8, Pages 841-847

Publisher

THIEME MEDICAL PUBL INC
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-3402749

Keywords

glucose challenge test; maternal hypoglycemia; low birth weight; maternal and neonatal outcomes

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Pregnant women with a low GCT value are at increased risk for having neonates with a birth weight less than the 10th percentile, but other pregnancy outcomes showed no significant differences between women with low and normal GCT values.
Objective This study aimed to perform a systematic review with meta-analysis to investigate if women with a low 50-g, 1-hour glucose challenge test (GCT) value are at risk for having neonates with a birth weight less than the 10th percentile. Study Design A computerized literature search was conducted to identify studies that compared outcomes of pregnant women with a low GCT value versus women with a normal GCT value during routine screening for gestational diabetes. Results Sixteen cohort studies were included for analysis. Women with a low GCT value were noted to have a 43% increased odds of having neonates with birth weight less than the 10th percentile (odds ratio [OR]: 1.43; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.28-1.60) and 30% increased odds of having neonates with a birth weight less than 2,500g (OR: 1.3; 95% CI: 1.0-1.7) when compared with women with a normal GCT value. The rates of preterm delivery, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission, pregnancy-induced hypertension (PIH)/preeclampsia, respiratory distress, NICU, and Apgar scores less than 7 were similar in the two groups. Conclusion A low GCT value defined as less than 90mg/dL identifies pregnancies at elevated risk for having neonates with a birth weight less than the 10th percentile.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available