Systematic review of the use of metformin compared to insulin for the management of gestational diabetes: Implications for low-resource settings.

IF 0.7 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Ribal Kattini, Len Kelly, Ruben Hummelen
{"title":"Systematic review of the use of metformin compared to insulin for the management of gestational diabetes: Implications for low-resource settings.","authors":"Ribal Kattini,&nbsp;Len Kelly,&nbsp;Ruben Hummelen","doi":"10.4103/cjrm.cjrm_40_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This systematic review examines the effectiveness of metformin treatment compared to insulin treatment for gestational diabetes within the context of a low-resource environment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Electronic data searches of Medline, EMBASE, Scopus and Google scholar databases from 1 January, 2005 to 30 June, 2021 were performed using medical subject headings: 'gestational diabetes or pregnancy diabetes mellitus' AND 'Pregnancy or pregnancy outcomes' AND 'Insulin' AND 'Metformin Hydrochloride Drug Combination/or Metformin/or Hypoglycemic Agents' AND 'Glycemic control or blood glucose'. Randomized controlled trials were included if: participants were pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM); the interventions were metformin and/or insulin. Studies among women with pre-gestational diabetes, non-randomised control trials or studies with a limited description of the methodology were excluded. Outcomes included adverse maternal outcomes: weight gain, C-section, pre-eclampsia and glycaemic control and adverse neonatal outcomes: birth weight, macrosomia, pre-term birth and neonatal hypoglycaemia. The revised Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment for randomised trials was used for the evaluation of bias.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We screened 164 abstracts and 36 full-text articles. Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria. The studies provide moderate to high-quality evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of metformin as an alternative therapy to insulin. Risk of bias was low; multiple countries and robust sample sizes improved external validity. All studies were from urban centres with no rural data.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These recent high quality studies comparing metformin to insulin for the treatment of GDM generally found either improved or equivalent pregnancy outcome and good glycaemic control for most patients, although many required insulin supplementation. Its ease of use, safety and efficacy suggest metformin may simplify the management of gestational diabetes, particularly in rural and other low-resource environments.</p>","PeriodicalId":44615,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Rural Medicine","volume":"28 2","pages":"59-65"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Rural Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/cjrm.cjrm_40_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: This systematic review examines the effectiveness of metformin treatment compared to insulin treatment for gestational diabetes within the context of a low-resource environment.

Methods: Electronic data searches of Medline, EMBASE, Scopus and Google scholar databases from 1 January, 2005 to 30 June, 2021 were performed using medical subject headings: 'gestational diabetes or pregnancy diabetes mellitus' AND 'Pregnancy or pregnancy outcomes' AND 'Insulin' AND 'Metformin Hydrochloride Drug Combination/or Metformin/or Hypoglycemic Agents' AND 'Glycemic control or blood glucose'. Randomized controlled trials were included if: participants were pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM); the interventions were metformin and/or insulin. Studies among women with pre-gestational diabetes, non-randomised control trials or studies with a limited description of the methodology were excluded. Outcomes included adverse maternal outcomes: weight gain, C-section, pre-eclampsia and glycaemic control and adverse neonatal outcomes: birth weight, macrosomia, pre-term birth and neonatal hypoglycaemia. The revised Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment for randomised trials was used for the evaluation of bias.

Results: We screened 164 abstracts and 36 full-text articles. Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria. The studies provide moderate to high-quality evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of metformin as an alternative therapy to insulin. Risk of bias was low; multiple countries and robust sample sizes improved external validity. All studies were from urban centres with no rural data.

Conclusion: These recent high quality studies comparing metformin to insulin for the treatment of GDM generally found either improved or equivalent pregnancy outcome and good glycaemic control for most patients, although many required insulin supplementation. Its ease of use, safety and efficacy suggest metformin may simplify the management of gestational diabetes, particularly in rural and other low-resource environments.

二甲双胍与胰岛素在妊娠糖尿病治疗中的系统评价:对低资源环境的影响。
本系统综述探讨了在低资源环境下二甲双胍治疗与胰岛素治疗对妊娠糖尿病的有效性。方法:对2005年1月1日至2021年6月30日的Medline、EMBASE、Scopus和Google scholar数据库进行电子数据检索,检索的医学主题为:“妊娠糖尿病或妊娠糖尿病”、“妊娠或妊娠结局”、“胰岛素”、“盐酸二甲双胍联合用药/或二甲双胍/或降糖药”和“血糖控制或血糖”。纳入随机对照试验的条件包括:受试者为妊娠期糖尿病(GDM)的孕妇;干预措施是二甲双胍和/或胰岛素。排除了对妊娠前糖尿病妇女的研究、非随机对照试验或对方法描述有限的研究。结果包括产妇不良结局:体重增加、剖腹产、先兆子痫和血糖控制;新生儿不良结局:出生体重、巨大儿、早产和新生儿低血糖。采用修订后的Cochrane随机试验偏倚风险评估来评估偏倚。结果:我们筛选了164篇摘要和36篇全文文章。14项研究符合纳入标准。这些研究提供了中等到高质量的证据,证明二甲双胍作为胰岛素替代疗法的有效性。偏倚风险低;多个国家和强大的样本量提高了外部效度。所有的研究都来自城市中心,没有农村数据。结论:这些近期高质量的研究比较了二甲双胍与胰岛素治疗GDM的效果,发现大多数患者的妊娠结局改善或相当,血糖控制良好,尽管许多患者需要补充胰岛素。二甲双胍的易用性、安全性和有效性表明,它可以简化妊娠糖尿病的管理,特别是在农村和其他资源匮乏的环境中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Canadian Journal of Rural Medicine
Canadian Journal of Rural Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
18.20%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: The Canadian Journal of Rural Medicine (CJRM) is a quarterly peer-reviewed journal available in print form and on the Internet. It is the first rural medical journal in the world indexed in Index Medicus, as well as MEDLINE/PubMed databases. CJRM seeks to promote research into rural health issues, promote the health of rural and remote communities, support and inform rural practitioners, provide a forum for debate and discussion of rural medicine, provide practical clinical information to rural practitioners and influence rural health policy by publishing articles that inform decision-makers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信