OBJECTIVETo compare the efficacy and safety of glyburide versus metformin and their combination for the treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSIn this prospective randomized controlled study, we randomly assigned patients with GDM at 13-33 weeks gestation and whose blood glucose was poorly controlled by diet to receive either glyburide or metformin. If optimal glycemic control was not achieved, the other drug was added. If adverse effects occurred, the drug was replaced. If both failed, insulin was given. The primary outcomes were the rate of treatment failure and glycemic control after the first-line medication according to mean daily glucose charts. RESULTSGlyburide was started in 53 patients and metformin in 51. In the glyburide group, the drug failed in 18 (34%) patients due to adverse effects (hypoglycemia) in 6 (11%) and lack of glycemic control in 12 (23%). In the metformin group, the drug failed in 15 (29%) patients, due to adverse effects (gastrointestinal) in 1 (2%) and lack of glycemic control in 14 (28%). Treatment success after second-line therapy was higher in the metformin group than in the glyburide group (13 of 15 [87%] vs. 9 of 18 [50%], respectively; P = 0.03). In the glyburide group, nine (17%) patients were eventually treated with insulin compared with two (4%) in the metformin group (P = 0.03). The combination of the drugs reduced the need for insulin from 33 (32%) to 11 (11%) patients (P = 0.0002). Mean daily blood glucose and other obstetrical and neonatal outcomes were comparable between groups, including macrosomia, neonatal hypoglycemia, and electrolyte imbalance. CONCLUSIONSGlyburide and metformin are comparable oral treatments for GDM regarding glucose control and adverse effects. Their combination demonstrates a high efficacy rate with a significantly reduced need for insulin, with a possible advantage for metformin over glyburide as first-line therapy.

Data regarding pregnancy outcomes in Alport syndrome is limited. The outcome seems favorable when pre-pregnancy kidney function is normal or near normal and when chronic hypertension/pre-eclampsia is absent.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the short-and long-term outcomes of children from pregnancies complicated with polyhydramnios, defined as amniotic fluid index (AFI) >24 cm, and with a normal detailed ultrasound examination. METHODS:This retrospective cohort study examined 134 children aged 4 to 9 years with polyhydramnios and normal detailed ultrasound examination during pregnancy compared with 268 controls with normal AFI and normal detailed ultrasound examination matched for maternal age, year of delivery, gestational week at delivery, and presence or absence of diabetes. The primary outcome was the rate of malformations diagnosed postnatally. Additional outcomes were obstetrics outcomes, genetic syndromes, and neurodevelopment. RESULTS:Polyhydramnios was associated with increased risk for cesarean delivery (CD) and birth weight >90th percentile. This elevation in CD was attributed to increased rate of elective CD due to suspected macrosomia. Polyhydramnios was associated with increased risk for congenital malformations (n = 25 [19%] compared with 27 [10%], respectively; P = .016) without a statistically significant increase in the rate of major malformations (11 [8%] vs. 10 [4%]; P = .057). Genetic syndromes were more prevalent in the polyhydramnios group (5 [3.7%] vs. 2 [0.75%]; P = .043), as were neurologic disorders and developmental delay (9.7% vs. 3%; P = .004). CONCLUSIONS:Despite a normal detailed ultrasound examination, polyhydramnios is associated with increased rate of fetal malformations, genetic syndromes, neurologic disorders, and developmental delay, which may be diagnosed only after birth.

Oral analgesia in fixed time intervals is superior to analgesia following demand.

Quinolones were associated with favourable pregnancy outcomes; caution should be taken in the first trimester.

The literature on risk factors for gestational diabetes mellitus recurrence is inconsistent and sometimes contradictory. The importance of inter-pregnancy interval and parity, remains unclear. We aimed to explore controversial risk factors for gestational diabetes mellitus recurrence, especially the modifiable ones, and to develop a prediction model in a cohort of women with gestational diabetes mellitus. A retrospective, population-based, cross-sectional cohort study was performed. The study included 788 women with gestational diabetes mellitus that delivered between 1991-2012 and had consecutive deliveries at a university affiliated hospital in Israel. Women with pre-existing diabetes were excluded. Factors associated with gestational diabetes mellitus recurrence were examined using log-binomial models to estimate prevalence ratios with 95 % confidence intervals. Multivariate analysis revealed that both inter-pregnancy interval and multiparity were significant risk factors for gestational diabetes mellitus recurrence. Other significant risk factors were maternal age, gestational diabetes mellitus diagnosis week, oral glucose tolerance test values, body mass index gain between pregnancies and insulin use; the latter and multiparity had the strongest effect size (PR ≥ 1.2). Among multiparous women, the association between inter-pregnancy interval and gestational diabetes mellitus recurrence was significantly lower (P = 0.0004) compared with primiparous women (PR = 1.11 [95 % CI 1.09-1.13] versus PR = 1.17 [95 % CI 1.15-1.20], respectively). The model we developed, predicts that reducing the inter-pregnancy interval and weight gain between pregnancies can reduce substantially the risk of gestational diabetes mellitus recurrence. The results suggest that weight gain and inter-pregnancy interval are modifiable risk factors for gestational diabetes mellitus recurrence. Our model could assist physicians in advising women with gestational diabetes mellitus in reducing the risk of recurrent gestational diabetes mellitus during subsequent pregnancies.

Objective: To establish the predictive probability for placenta-associated morbidities using second-trimester α-fetoprotein (AFP), human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG), and maternal features. Patients and Methods: A retrospective database of all singleton deliveries with available second-trimester HCG and AFP results from 2005 to 2012 was built and divided into 0, 1, or 2 elevated markers (defined as ≥2 multiples of the median [MoM]). For each group, we analyzed the risk for adverse obstetric outcome - comprising preeclampsia, placental abruption, and birth weight below the 10th percentile - and the time of delivery in those pregnancies. Additionally, prediction models for adverse obstetric outcome, using logistic regression incorporating AFP, HCG, and other maternal characteristics, were calculated. Results: Among 22,124 women who delivered, 16,197 (73%) had AFP and HCG results. Compared with the group with normal markers, the adverse obstetric outcome rate was mildly increased with elevated HCG or AFP, but it was markedly increased when both markers were elevated (13 vs. 31%, OR 2.9, 95% CI 2.0-4.3). Delivery of newborns with adverse obstetric outcome was earlier with each additional elevated marker. The accuracy of predicting adverse obstetric outcome was improved by using prediction models for women with HCG or AFP ≥1.2 MoM that incorporated maternal age, BMI, parity, and chronic hypertension (C-statistic 61-75%). Conclusion: HCG and AFP combined with other maternal characteristics are useful tools for predicting the risk for adverse obstetric outcome.

Background To examine whether glycemic control of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) could modify the risk for future maternal metabolic and cardiovascular morbidities. Methods A retrospective cohort study of women with a first diagnosis of GDM who delivered between 1991 and 2011. Women were divided into groups of good and poor glycemic control, defined as a mean daily glucose of up to 95 mg/dL (N = 230) and more than 95 mg/dL (N = 216), respectively. In addition, a control group of women without GDM (N = 352) was also analyzed. The primary outcomes were the development of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), obesity, hypertension, or dyslipidemia. Results Mean follow-up time was 15.8 ± 5.1 years. Assessment was performed at a maternal age of 45 ± 7 years. The rates of the study outcomes in the control, GDM with good glycemic control and GDM with poor glycemic control were as follows: T2DM [19 (5.4%), 87 (38%), 127 (57%)]; hypertension [44 (13%), 42 (18%), 44 (20%)]; obesity [111 (32%), 112 (48%), 129 (58%)]; and dyslipidemia [49 (14%), 67 (29%), 106 (48%)]. Glycemic control was an independent risk factor for T2DM in multivariate Cox regression analysis (hazard ratio (HR) for poor glycemic control vs. controls 10.7 95% CI [6.0–19.0], good glycemic control vs. control HR 6.0 [3.3–10.8], and poor glycemic control vs. good glycemic control HR 1.8 [1.3–2.4]). Glycemic control was also an independent risk factor for dyslipidemia (poor glycemic control vs. controls HR 3.7 [2.3–5.8], good glycemic control vs. controls HR 2.0 [1.2–3.2], and poor glycemic control vs. good glycemic control HR 1.8 1.8 [1.3–2.6]). The fasting glucose level during oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) was also an independent risk factor for these complications. The interaction term between glycemic control and the fasting value of the OGTT was not statistically significant, suggesting that the effect of glycemic control on the rate of future T2DM and dyslipidemia was not modified by the baseline severity of GDM. Conclusion GDM and especially poor glycemic control are associated with T2DM and dyslipidemia. Strict glycemic control for reducing that risk should be evaluated in prospective trials.