妊娠糖尿病与不良妊娠结局风险的异质性:一项队列研究。

IF 5 2区 医学 Q1 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Yixin Gong, Qunhua Wang, Suyu Chen, Yujie Liu, Chenghua Li, Rong Kang, Jing Wang, Tian Wei, Qin Wang, Xianming Li, Sihui Luo, Jianping Weng, Xueying Zheng, Yu Ding
{"title":"妊娠糖尿病与不良妊娠结局风险的异质性:一项队列研究。","authors":"Yixin Gong, Qunhua Wang, Suyu Chen, Yujie Liu, Chenghua Li, Rong Kang, Jing Wang, Tian Wei, Qin Wang, Xianming Li, Sihui Luo, Jianping Weng, Xueying Zheng, Yu Ding","doi":"10.1210/clinem/dgae754","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Diabetes has increasingly been recognized as a heterogeneous disease, with clinical characteristics and outcomes risk varying across different phenotypes. Evidence on heterogeneity of gestational diabetes (GDM) is yet to be provided.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate the insulin physiology and pregnancy outcomes of GDM phenotypes characterized by fasting hyperglycemia or postload hyperglycemia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 2050 women who underwent a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test were prospectively recruited and followed up until delivery. Women were categorized into normoglycemia (NGT, n = 936), isolated impaired fasting glucose (gestational-IFG, n = 378), and isolated impaired postload glucose tolerance (gestational-IGT, n = 736) groups. Fasting blood sample at mid-pregnancy were collected to measure C-peptide and insulin concentrations. Homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) and quantitative insulin sensitivity check index (QUICKI) were used to evaluate insulin physiology. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Gestational-IFG had greater insulin resistance (HOMA-IR 3.11 vs. 2.25, QUICKI-CP 0.94 vs. 1.03, both P < 0.01), and gestational-IGT had worse β-cell function (C-peptide 2.00 vs. 2.26 ng/ml, P < 0.05) when compared to one another. Gestational-IFG was more strongly associated with excessive gestational weight gain (RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.18-2.23) and large-for-gestational-age infants (RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.03-2.03) than gestational-IGT. The risk for neonatal brain injury was increased in gestational-IGT (RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.04-4.09), but not in gestational-IFG (P = 0.439). Gestational-IGT showed a stronger association with the risk of preterm birth compared to gestational-IFG (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.02-3.36).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>GDM exhibits distinct insulin physiology profiles. Pregnancy outcome varies between each phenotype. These findings provide evidence on risk stratification and diverse strategies for the treatment of GDM.</p>","PeriodicalId":50238,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Heterogeneity of gestational diabetes and risk for adverse pregnancy outcome: a cohort study.\",\"authors\":\"Yixin Gong, Qunhua Wang, Suyu Chen, Yujie Liu, Chenghua Li, Rong Kang, Jing Wang, Tian Wei, Qin Wang, Xianming Li, Sihui Luo, Jianping Weng, Xueying Zheng, Yu Ding\",\"doi\":\"10.1210/clinem/dgae754\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Diabetes has increasingly been recognized as a heterogeneous disease, with clinical characteristics and outcomes risk varying across different phenotypes. Evidence on heterogeneity of gestational diabetes (GDM) is yet to be provided.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate the insulin physiology and pregnancy outcomes of GDM phenotypes characterized by fasting hyperglycemia or postload hyperglycemia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 2050 women who underwent a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test were prospectively recruited and followed up until delivery. Women were categorized into normoglycemia (NGT, n = 936), isolated impaired fasting glucose (gestational-IFG, n = 378), and isolated impaired postload glucose tolerance (gestational-IGT, n = 736) groups. Fasting blood sample at mid-pregnancy were collected to measure C-peptide and insulin concentrations. Homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) and quantitative insulin sensitivity check index (QUICKI) were used to evaluate insulin physiology. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Gestational-IFG had greater insulin resistance (HOMA-IR 3.11 vs. 2.25, QUICKI-CP 0.94 vs. 1.03, both P < 0.01), and gestational-IGT had worse β-cell function (C-peptide 2.00 vs. 2.26 ng/ml, P < 0.05) when compared to one another. Gestational-IFG was more strongly associated with excessive gestational weight gain (RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.18-2.23) and large-for-gestational-age infants (RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.03-2.03) than gestational-IGT. The risk for neonatal brain injury was increased in gestational-IGT (RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.04-4.09), but not in gestational-IFG (P = 0.439). Gestational-IGT showed a stronger association with the risk of preterm birth compared to gestational-IFG (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.02-3.36).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>GDM exhibits distinct insulin physiology profiles. Pregnancy outcome varies between each phenotype. These findings provide evidence on risk stratification and diverse strategies for the treatment of GDM.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50238,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1210/clinem/dgae754\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1210/clinem/dgae754","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:人们越来越认识到糖尿病是一种异质性疾病,不同表型的糖尿病具有不同的临床特征和预后风险。有关妊娠期糖尿病(GDM)异质性的证据尚未提供:目的:研究以空腹高血糖或负荷后高血糖为特征的 GDM 表型的胰岛素生理和妊娠结局:方法:前瞻性地招募了 2050 名接受过 75 克口服葡萄糖耐量试验的妇女,并对其进行随访直至分娩。妇女被分为血糖正常组(NGT,n = 936)、孤立空腹血糖受损组(妊娠-IFG,n = 378)和孤立负荷后糖耐量受损组(妊娠-IGT,n = 736)。采集孕中期空腹血样以测量 C 肽和胰岛素浓度。采用稳态模型评估(HOMA)和定量胰岛素敏感性检查指数(QUICKI)评估胰岛素生理机能。记录了产妇和新生儿的结局:结果:妊娠-IFG 的胰岛素抵抗更强(HOMA-IR 3.11 对 2.25,QUICKI-CP 0.94 对 1.03,均为 P 结论:妊娠-IFG 的胰岛素抵抗更强:GDM 表现出不同的胰岛素生理特征。每种表型的妊娠结局都各不相同。这些发现为 GDM 的风险分层和不同的治疗策略提供了证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Heterogeneity of gestational diabetes and risk for adverse pregnancy outcome: a cohort study.

Context: Diabetes has increasingly been recognized as a heterogeneous disease, with clinical characteristics and outcomes risk varying across different phenotypes. Evidence on heterogeneity of gestational diabetes (GDM) is yet to be provided.

Objective: To investigate the insulin physiology and pregnancy outcomes of GDM phenotypes characterized by fasting hyperglycemia or postload hyperglycemia.

Methods: A total of 2050 women who underwent a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test were prospectively recruited and followed up until delivery. Women were categorized into normoglycemia (NGT, n = 936), isolated impaired fasting glucose (gestational-IFG, n = 378), and isolated impaired postload glucose tolerance (gestational-IGT, n = 736) groups. Fasting blood sample at mid-pregnancy were collected to measure C-peptide and insulin concentrations. Homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) and quantitative insulin sensitivity check index (QUICKI) were used to evaluate insulin physiology. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were recorded.

Results: Gestational-IFG had greater insulin resistance (HOMA-IR 3.11 vs. 2.25, QUICKI-CP 0.94 vs. 1.03, both P < 0.01), and gestational-IGT had worse β-cell function (C-peptide 2.00 vs. 2.26 ng/ml, P < 0.05) when compared to one another. Gestational-IFG was more strongly associated with excessive gestational weight gain (RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.18-2.23) and large-for-gestational-age infants (RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.03-2.03) than gestational-IGT. The risk for neonatal brain injury was increased in gestational-IGT (RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.04-4.09), but not in gestational-IFG (P = 0.439). Gestational-IGT showed a stronger association with the risk of preterm birth compared to gestational-IFG (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.02-3.36).

Conclusion: GDM exhibits distinct insulin physiology profiles. Pregnancy outcome varies between each phenotype. These findings provide evidence on risk stratification and diverse strategies for the treatment of GDM.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism
Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism 医学-内分泌学与代谢
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
5.20%
发文量
673
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism is the world"s leading peer-reviewed journal for endocrine clinical research and cutting edge clinical practice reviews. Each issue provides the latest in-depth coverage of new developments enhancing our understanding, diagnosis and treatment of endocrine and metabolic disorders. Regular features of special interest to endocrine consultants include clinical trials, clinical reviews, clinical practice guidelines, case seminars, and controversies in clinical endocrinology, as well as original reports of the most important advances in patient-oriented endocrine and metabolic research. According to the latest Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Report, JCE&M articles were cited 64,185 times in 2008.
×
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