Change in the number of patients after the adoption of IADPSG criteria for hyperglycemia during pregnancy in Japanese women

Gestational diabetes mellitus in an Iranian pregnant population using IADPSG criteria: Incidence, contributing factors and outcomes

“…Duran et al showed the use of IADPSG criteria is associated 3.5 fold increase in GDM occurrence (35.5% vs 10.6% in comparison with Carpenter-Coustan criteria) [26]. In line with this result, Morikawa et al reported at least 2.7 times increase in frequency of GDM based on IADPSG criteria [34].…”

“…Center-to-center variation in frequency of GDM (unadjusted frequency range 9.3-25.5%) was reported by HAPO study team based on IADPSG recommendation in 15 centers in the world [23]. In spite of wide variation in prevalence of GDM, almost all of international released data showed higher rate of gestational diabetes in accordance with IADPSG criteria (from 2.4% to 6.6% in Japan, from 9.6% to 13% in Australia, 12.9% to 37.7% in the United Arab Emirates and from 9.4% to 12.4% in Ireland) [20,34,37,38]. Prevalence of GDM is also influenced by population features including ethnic differences what makes a wide variability between and within different centers in the world [39].…”

Assessment of predictors of insulin therapy in patients with gestational diabetes diagnosed according to the IADPSG criteria

“…According to the IADPSG criteria, the diagnosis of gestational diabetes is made when any of the following three values are met or exceeded: fasting plasma glucose level, 92 mg/dL; 1-h plasma glucose level, 180 mg/dL; and 2-h plasma glucose level, 153 mg/dL. After using the new criteria, the number of patients with gestational diabetes increased from 2.4 to 6.6 % due to the lowering of the fasting glucose threshold value and the need to meet only one threshold value instead of at least two threshold values [7].…”

Gestational diabetes mellitus: In search of better screening and diagnostic pathway for Sri Lankan women

“…Other reason for the dramatic rise in the prevalence of GDM in our study is the adoption of new diagnostic criteria (IADPSG). Previous studies too had reported that the change in diagnostic criteria from the previously utilised criteria to the new IADPSG criteria would increase the prevalence of GDM by 4% -5% (25,26). The forth study present here was designed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of GTT over a period of 10 years.…”