Ana M. Fernández-Alonso, Angélica Monterrosa-Blanco, Álvaro Monterrosa-Castro, Faustino R. Pérez-López
{"title":"单胎妊娠中根据超声胎儿生长情况进行妊娠糖尿病管理与严格血糖治疗的比较:临床试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Ana M. Fernández-Alonso, Angélica Monterrosa-Blanco, Álvaro Monterrosa-Castro, Faustino R. Pérez-López","doi":"10.1111/jog.16059","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aim</h3>\n \n <p>The objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate obstetric outcomes in gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) patients treated with flexible management based on intrauterine ultrasound fetal growth (FMIUFG) or strict maternal glycemic adjustment (SMGA).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We performed a comprehensive systematic review of electronic databases for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing obstetrics outcomes of singleton GDM patients managed according to FMIUFG or SMGA. The review protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD497888). Searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and LILACS. Primary outcomes were gestational age at delivery and birth weight. Random-effect model meta-analyses were used to minimize the effects of uncertainty associated with inter-study variability. Results are reported as standardized mean differences (SMDs) or as odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity between studies was estimated using the <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> statistic. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Scale was used to assess the quality of studies. There were five RCTs with low to moderate risk of bias, including 450 patients managed according to the FMIUFSG and 381 according to the SMGA.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The macrosomia (birthweight >4000 g) rate was lower in pregnancies managed according to FMIUFG than SMGA adjustments (OR: 0.34; 95%CI: 0.16, 0.71). There were no significant differences in hypertensive disorder, cesarean section, neonatal intensive care unit admission, and large newborn for gestational age rates.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The macrosomia rate was lower in women managed with the FMIUFG. There were no significant differences in other obstetric and neonate outcomes.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":16593,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jog.16059","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Gestational diabetes mellitus management according to ultrasound fetal growth versus strict glycemic treatment in singleton pregnancies: A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials\",\"authors\":\"Ana M. Fernández-Alonso, Angélica Monterrosa-Blanco, Álvaro Monterrosa-Castro, Faustino R. Pérez-López\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jog.16059\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Aim</h3>\\n \\n <p>The objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate obstetric outcomes in gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) patients treated with flexible management based on intrauterine ultrasound fetal growth (FMIUFG) or strict maternal glycemic adjustment (SMGA).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We performed a comprehensive systematic review of electronic databases for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing obstetrics outcomes of singleton GDM patients managed according to FMIUFG or SMGA. The review protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD497888). Searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and LILACS. Primary outcomes were gestational age at delivery and birth weight. Random-effect model meta-analyses were used to minimize the effects of uncertainty associated with inter-study variability. Results are reported as standardized mean differences (SMDs) or as odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity between studies was estimated using the <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> statistic. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Scale was used to assess the quality of studies. There were five RCTs with low to moderate risk of bias, including 450 patients managed according to the FMIUFSG and 381 according to the SMGA.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>The macrosomia (birthweight >4000 g) rate was lower in pregnancies managed according to FMIUFG than SMGA adjustments (OR: 0.34; 95%CI: 0.16, 0.71). There were no significant differences in hypertensive disorder, cesarean section, neonatal intensive care unit admission, and large newborn for gestational age rates.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>The macrosomia rate was lower in women managed with the FMIUFG. There were no significant differences in other obstetric and neonate outcomes.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16593,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jog.16059\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jog.16059\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jog.16059","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Gestational diabetes mellitus management according to ultrasound fetal growth versus strict glycemic treatment in singleton pregnancies: A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials
Aim
The objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate obstetric outcomes in gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) patients treated with flexible management based on intrauterine ultrasound fetal growth (FMIUFG) or strict maternal glycemic adjustment (SMGA).
Methods
We performed a comprehensive systematic review of electronic databases for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing obstetrics outcomes of singleton GDM patients managed according to FMIUFG or SMGA. The review protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD497888). Searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and LILACS. Primary outcomes were gestational age at delivery and birth weight. Random-effect model meta-analyses were used to minimize the effects of uncertainty associated with inter-study variability. Results are reported as standardized mean differences (SMDs) or as odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity between studies was estimated using the I2 statistic. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Scale was used to assess the quality of studies. There were five RCTs with low to moderate risk of bias, including 450 patients managed according to the FMIUFSG and 381 according to the SMGA.
Results
The macrosomia (birthweight >4000 g) rate was lower in pregnancies managed according to FMIUFG than SMGA adjustments (OR: 0.34; 95%CI: 0.16, 0.71). There were no significant differences in hypertensive disorder, cesarean section, neonatal intensive care unit admission, and large newborn for gestational age rates.
Conclusions
The macrosomia rate was lower in women managed with the FMIUFG. There were no significant differences in other obstetric and neonate outcomes.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research is the official Journal of the Asia and Oceania Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology and of the Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology, and aims to provide a medium for the publication of articles in the fields of obstetrics and gynecology.
The Journal publishes original research articles, case reports, review articles and letters to the editor. The Journal will give publication priority to original research articles over case reports. Accepted papers become the exclusive licence of the Journal. Manuscripts are peer reviewed by at least two referees and/or Associate Editors expert in the field of the submitted paper.