Background Pregnancy induces physiological changes which affect biochemical and haematological parameters. As the significance of laboratory test results change throughout pregnancy, the reference interval (RI) or key result interpretive guide, should be specific to pregnancy. This study sought to establish trimester-specific-RIs for routine biochemical and haematological tests in healthy white European women with singleton pregnancies with comparison to RIs for non-pregnant European adults.
Methods A retrospective analysis of a prospective longitudinal single-centre study of healthy pregnant women conducted between November 2018 and December 2020 in a tertiary academic hospital with approximately 3000 births annually. Inclusion criteria: signed informed consent, age≥18years, white European, body mass index (BMI)<25kg/m2, blood pressure<140/90mmHg, non-smoker, no previous pathology or gestational diabetes. Trimester defined as, T1:up to 13weeks+6days, T2:14-27weeks+6days, T3:≥28-41weeks+6days. Baseline demographics, anthropometric and laboratory measurements were recorded. In total, 31 biochemical and 10 haematological ISO15189:2012 accredited tests were measured using Roche Cobas® and Sysmex XN-9100™ analysers respectively. RIs were established according to the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry (IFCC) recommended method.
Results Apparently healthy pregnant women (n=124) with bio-banked serum samples in each trimester were recruited. At the booking visit, 49.2% (n=61) of participants were nulliparous, with median: age of 34.4(IQR: 31.3-37.3) years, gestational age of 89(IQR:84-93) days, BMI of 22.5(IQR:21.0-23.7) kg/m2, systolic and diastolic blood pressure of 116(110-125) mmHg and 67 (61-75) mmHg respectively.
Conclusions Normative trimester-specific biological intervals for routinely requested biochemical and haematological medical laboratory tests were established. These RIs will be invaluable to result interpretation and the management of pregnant women.
: The aim of this study was to evaluate the ability of second trimester plasma glycated CD59 (pGCD59), a novel biomarker, to predict the results of the 2 h 75 g oral glucose tolerance test at 24–28 weeks of gestation, employing the 2013 World Health Organisation criteria. This was a prospective study of 378 pregnant women. The ability of pGCD59 to predict gestational diabetes (GDM) was assessed using adjusted ROC curves for maternal age, BMI, maternal ethnicity, parity, previous GDM, and family history of diabetes. The pGCD59 levels were significantly higher in women with GDM compared to women with normal glucose tolerance (p = 0.003). The pGCD59 generated an adjusted AUC for identifying GDM cases of 0.65 (95% CI: 0.58–0.71, p < 0.001). The pGCD59 predicted GDM status diagnosed by a fasting glucose value of 5.1 mmol/L with an adjusted AUC of 0.74 (95%CI: 0.65–0.81, p < 0.001). Analysis of BMI subgroups determined that pGCD59 generated the highest AUC in the 35 kg/m2 ≤ BMI < 40 kg/m2 (AUC: 0.84 95%CI: 0.69–0.98) and BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2 (AUC: 0.96 95%CI: 0.86–0.99) categories. This study found that second trimester pGCD59 is a fair predictor of GDM status diagnosed by elevated fasting glucose independent of BMI and an excellent predictor of GDM in subjects with a very high BMI.
IntroductionDiabetes mellitus is the most common metabolic complication of pregnancy and its prevalence worldwide is rising. The number of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) being conducted in people with diabetes is also increasing. Many studies preferentially publish findings on clinical endpoints and do not report patient-reported outcomes (PROs). In studies that do include PROs, PRO reporting is often of poor quality.MethodsWe will conduct this systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Using a combination of medical subject headings and keywords (combined using Boolean operators), we will search web-based databases (PubMed, Cochrane and EMBASE) for RCTs published in English between 2013 and 2021. Two reviewers will review titles and abstracts. We will review the full texts of any relevant abstracts and extract the following data: date of publication or recruitment period, journal of publication, country of study, multicentre or single centre, population and number of participants, type of intervention, frequency of PRO assessment and type of PRO (or PRO measurement) used. We will also record if the PRO was a primary, secondary or exploratory outcome. We will exclude reviews, observational studies, unpublished data for example, conference abstracts and trial protocols. Any published RCT that includes data on a PRO as a primary or secondary outcome will then be compared against the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials—Patient-Reported Outcome extension checklist, a structured and approved framework for the publication of results of PROs.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval to conduct this study was obtained from the ethics committee at Galway University Hospitals on 24 March 2021 (CA 2592). We aim to publish our findings in a peer-reviewed journal and present our findings at national and international conferences.Systematic review registrationThis systematic review was registered prospectively with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). Registration number CRD42021234917.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.