Planned vaginal and planned cesarean delivery outcomes in pregnancies complicated with pregestational type 1 diabetes – A three-year academic tertiary hospital cohort study

Abstract

Background Finland has the world’s highest incidence of 62.5/100000 of diabetes mellitus type 1 (DM1) with approximately 400 (1%) DM1 pregnancies annually. Pregnancies complicated by DM1 are accompanied with increased risk for perinatal morbidity and mortality. Timing and mode of delivery are based on the risk of complications, yet the data on labor induction is limited. The aim of this study was to compare delivery outcomes in planned vaginal (VD) and planned cesarean deliveries (CD) in late preterm and term DM1 pregnancies, and to evaluate the feasibility of labor induction. Materials and Methods Pregnant women with DM1, live singleton fetus in cephalic presentation ≥34 gestational weeks delivering in Helsinki University Hospital between January 1st 2017 and December 31st 2019 were included. The primary outcome were the rates of adverse maternal and perinatal outcome. The study population was classified according to the 1980-revised White’s classification. Statistical analyses were performed by IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows. Results Two hundred four women were included, 59.8% (n = 122) had planned VD. The rate of adverse maternal outcome was 27.5% (n = 56), similar between the planned modes of delivery and White classes. The rate of perinatal adverse outcome was 38.7% (n = 79), higher in planned CD (52.4% vs. 29.5%;p = 0.001). The most common adverse perinatal event was respiratory distress (48.8% vs. 23.0%;p < 0.001). The rate of adverse perinatal outcome was higher in White class D + Vascular compared to B + C (45.0% vs. 25.0%, OR after adjustment by gestational age 2.34 [95% CI 1.20–4.50];p = 0.01). The total rate of CD was 63.7% (n = 130), and 39.3% (n = 48) in planned VD. Women with White class D + Vascular more often had emergency CD compared to White Class B + C (48.6% vs. 25.0%;p = 0.009). The rate of labor induction was 51%, being 85.2% in planned VD. The rate of VD in induced labor was 58.7% (n = 61) and the rate of failed induction was 14.1% (n = 15). Conclusion Planned VD was associated with lower rate of adverse perinatal outcome compared to planned CS, with no difference in the rates of adverse maternal outcome. Induction of labor may be feasible option but should be carefully considered in this high-risk population.

Maternal Diabetes Mellitus and Neonatal Outcomes in Bisha: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

“…In GDM, unexpected and different outcomes between this research and previous studies described that almost half of the patients delivered by CS and the other half delivered vaginally, but this differs from a study done in Saudi Arabia (SA) in which vaginal delivery was more common than CS [8,[17][18][19]. In pre-GDM, unexpected and different outcomes between this study and previous studies described vaginal delivery as more common than CS [8,20]. It was also noted that that not all patients who undergo CS should be viewed as having unfavorable pregnancy outcomes; instead, CS is frequently suggested as a preventive measure used by healthcare professionals to reduce the risk of perinatal problems brought on by maternal diabetes [21].…”

High glucose induced HIF-1α/TREK1 expression and myometrium relaxation during pregnancy

“…Several studies have shown that the rate of cesarean section and postpartum hemorrhage in patients with GDM is significantly higher than that in women without GDM (3)(4)(5)(6), and more than 30% of cesarean sections in patients with GDM are due to failed vaginal birth (7). Failed vaginal delivery trial and postpartum hemorrhage are associated with uterine atony (8,9), suggesting that GDM affects uterine contractility. An in vitro trial of isolated uteri in patients with diabetes confirmed that high glucose levels caused poor uterine contractility (10).…”

The Prediction of Diabetes

“…[17] Found a positive relationship between the growth of the mean glucose value and the value of Large for Gestational Age-LGA and neonatal composite outcome-NCO. [18] consider the difference between Vaginal Delivery-VD and Caesarean Delivery-CD in a sample of Finnish women in childbirth characterized by gestational diabetes mellitus. The authors verify that the adverse consequences of childbirth tend to be greater in the case of using Caesarean Delivery-CD than with Vaginal Delivery-VD.…”