Gynecologic and obstetric investigation · 2015
Pregnancy and Neonatal Outcomes in Gestational Diabetes Treated with Regular Insulin or Fast-Acting Insulin Analogues.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
You Ji Yeon, Choi Suk-Joo, Roh Cheong-Rae, Kim Jong-Hwa, Oh Soo-Young
Аннотация
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Fast-acting insulin analogues (FAIAs) are being used more frequently during pregnancy. Previous studies comparing regular insulin (RI) and FAIA consist primarily of women enrolled with pre-existing diabetes; therefore, we compared pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in women with gestational diabetes.
METHODS: We retrospectively investigated 197 pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) requiring insulin treatment for glycemic control. Individuals were divided into 2 groups: RI (n = 55) and FAIA (aspart or lispro; n = 142). Pregnancy outcomes, including caesarean section rate, and neonatal outcomes, including macrosomia and ponderal index, were compared between groups.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences in maternal baseline characteristics (age, parity, body mass index and weight gain) between groups or in haemoglobinA1c before delivery. The frequency of emergency caesarean section (caesarean section after trial of labor) was not significantly different between groups (RI 16.7%, FAIA 24.7%; p = 0.452). There were no differences in frequencies of macrosomia (RI 3.4%, FAIA 6.5%; p = 0.518), ponderal index (RI 2.65 ± 0.5, FAIA 2.71 ± 0.5; p = 0.322), cranial-thoracic circumference ratio (RI 1.07 ± 0.06, FAIA 1.07 ± 0.06; p = 0.386) or neonatal hypoglycemia (RI 5.1%, FAIA 5.8%; p = 1.000).
CONCLUSION: Our data indicate that FAIA achieves similar pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in GDM compared with RI. Considering patient convenience, FAIA may be better to use during pregnancy.
METHODS: We retrospectively investigated 197 pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) requiring insulin treatment for glycemic control. Individuals were divided into 2 groups: RI (n = 55) and FAIA (aspart or lispro; n = 142). Pregnancy outcomes, including caesarean section rate, and neonatal outcomes, including macrosomia and ponderal index, were compared between groups.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences in maternal baseline characteristics (age, parity, body mass index and weight gain) between groups or in haemoglobinA1c before delivery. The frequency of emergency caesarean section (caesarean section after trial of labor) was not significantly different between groups (RI 16.7%, FAIA 24.7%; p = 0.452). There were no differences in frequencies of macrosomia (RI 3.4%, FAIA 6.5%; p = 0.518), ponderal index (RI 2.65 ± 0.5, FAIA 2.71 ± 0.5; p = 0.322), cranial-thoracic circumference ratio (RI 1.07 ± 0.06, FAIA 1.07 ± 0.06; p = 0.386) or neonatal hypoglycemia (RI 5.1%, FAIA 5.8%; p = 1.000).
CONCLUSION: Our data indicate that FAIA achieves similar pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in GDM compared with RI. Considering patient convenience, FAIA may be better to use during pregnancy.