Diabetes in Pregnancy: Timing and Mode of Delivery

  • Gianpaolo Maso
  • Monica Piccoli
  • Sara Parolin
  • Stefano Restaino
  • Salvatore Alberico
Diabetes and Pregnancy (CJ Homko, Section Editor)
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Diabetes and Pregnancy


Diabetes in pregnancy represents a risk condition for adverse maternal and feto-neonatal outcomes and many of these complications might occur during labor and delivery. In this context, the obstetrician managing women with pre-existing and gestational diabetes should consider (1) how these conditions might affect labor and delivery outcomes; (2) what are the current recommendations on management; and (3) which other factors should be considered to decide about the timing and mode of delivery. The analysis of the studies considered in this review leads to the conclusion that the decision to deliver should be primarily intended to reduce the risk of stillbirth, macrosomia, and shoulder dystocia. In this context, this review provides useful information for managing specific subgroups of diabetic women that may present overlapping risk factors, such as women with insulin-requiring diabetes and/or obesity and/or prenatal suspicion of macrosomic fetus. To date, the lack of definitive evidences and the complexity of the problem suggest that the “appropriate” clinical management should be customized according with the clinical condition, the type and mode of intervention, its consequences on outcomes, and considering the woman’s consent and informed decisions.


Birth injuries Cesarean delivery Delivery Excessive fetal growth Gestational diabetes Induction of labor Labor Macrosomia Obesity Pregestational diabetes Pregnancy Review Shoulder dystocia Type 1 diabetes Type 2 diabetes 


Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

Conflict of Interest

Gianpaolo Maso, Monica Piccoli, Sara Parolin, Stefano Restaino, and Salvatore Alberico declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.


Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    Bellamy L, Casas JP, Hingorani AD, et al. Type 2 diabetes mellitus after gestational diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2009;373:1773–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hayfaa A, Wahabi HA, Esmaeil SA, Fayed A, et al. Pre-existing diabetes mellitus and adverse pregnancy outcomes. BMC Res Notes. 2012;5:496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Persson M, Norman M, Hanson U. Obstetric and perinatal outcomes in type 1 diabetic pregnancies: a large, population-based study. Diabetes Care. 2009;32:2005–9.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Knight KM, Pressman EK, Hackney DN, et al. Perinatal outcomes in type 2 diabetic patients compared with non-diabetic patients matched by body mass index. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2012;25:611–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Knight KM, Thornburg LL, Pressman EK. Pregnancy outcomes in type 2 diabetic patients compared with type 1 diabetic patients and nondiabetic controls. J Reprod Med. 2012;57:397–404.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hawthorne G. Maternal complications in diabetic pregnancy. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2011;25:77–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.•
    McCance DR. Pregnancy and diabetes. Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2011;25:945–58. This review highlighted the clinical relevance of diabetes in pregnancy, evaluating pregnancy outcomes in women with type 1 and 2 diabetes.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Balsells M, Garcia-Patterson A, Gich I, et al. Maternal and fetal outcome in women with type 2 vs type 1 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Endocrinol Metabol. 2009;94:4284–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dunne F. Type 2 diabetes and pregnancy. Semin Fetal Neonat Med. 2005;10:333e339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Confidential enquiry into maternal and child health. Pregnancy in women with type 1 and type 2 diabetes in 2002–2003. CEMACH study. 2005.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jensen DM, Damm P, Moelsted-Pedersen L, et al. Outcomes in type 1 diabetic pregnancies: a nationwide, population-based study. Diabetes Care. 2004;27:2819–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.•
    Young BC, Ecker JL. Fetal macrosomia and shoulder dystocia in women with gestational diabetes: risks amenable to treatment? Curr Diabet Rep. 2013;13:12–8. This review considered the impact of glycemic control on neonatal morbidities resulting from the recently published randomized controlled clinical trials and from the HAPO study.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Langer O, Yogev Y, Most O, et al. Gestational diabetes: the consequences of not treating. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192:989–97.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wendland EM, Torloni MR, Falavigna M, et al. Gestational diabetes and pregnancy outcomes– a systematic review of the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Association of Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) diagnostic criteria. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2012;12:23.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hartling L, Dryden DM, Guthrie A, et al. Screening and diagnosing gestational diabetes mellitus. Evid Rep Technol Assess. 2012;210:1–327.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Vandorsten JP, Dodson WC, Espeland MA, et al. NIH consensus development conference: diagnosing gestational diabetes mellitus. NIH Consens State Sci Statements. 2013;29:1–31.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Diagnostic criteria and classification of hyperglycaemia first detected in pregnancy. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2013.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Metzger BE, Lowe LP, Dyer AR, et al. Hyperglycemia and adverse pregnancy outcomes. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:1991–2002.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    HAPO Study Cooperative Research Group. Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome (HAPO) Study: associations with neonatal anthropometrics. Diabetes. 2009;58:453–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Clinical management guidelines for obstetrician-gynecologists. Fetal macrosomia. ACOG practice bulletin no.22. Washington, DC: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; 2000.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Xu H, Simonet F, Luo ZC. Optimal birth weight percentile cut-offs in defining small- or large-for-gestational-age. Acta Paediatr. 2010;99:550.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Boulet SL, Alexander GR, Salihu HM, et al. Macrosomic births in the United States: determinants, outcomes, and proposed grades of risk. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003;188:1372–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Alexander GR, Himes JH, Kaufman RB, et al. A United States national reference for fetal growth. Obstet Gynecol. 1996;87:163–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.•
    Campbell S. Fetal macrosomia: a problem in need of a policy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014;43:3–10. This editorial focused on the clinical significance of fetal macrosomia, providing information on the diagnosis and management.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ben-Haroush A, Chen R, Hadar E, et al. Accuracy of a single fetal weight estimation at 29-34 weeks in diabetic pregnancies: can it predict large-for-gestational-age infants at term? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197:497.e1–6.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Suneet P, Chauhan SP, Grobman WA, et al. Suspicion and treatment of the macrosomic fetus: a review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;193:332–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Coomarasamy A, Connock M, Thornton J, et al. Accuracy of ultrasound biometry in the prediction of macrosomia: a systematic quantitative review. BJOG. 2005;112:1461–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Weissmann-Brenner A, Simchen MJ, Zilberberg E, et al. Maternal and neonatal outcomes of macrosomic pregnancies. Med Sci Monit. 2012;18:PH77–81.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Acker DB, Sachs BP, Friedman EA. Risk factors for shoulder dystocia in the average-weight infant. Obstet Gynecol. 1986;67:614–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ecker JL, Greenberg JA, Norwitz ER, et al. Birth weight as a predictor of brachial plexus injury. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;89:643–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Nesbitt TS, Gilbert WM, Herrchen B. Shoulder dystocia and associated risk factors with macrosomic infants born in California. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1998;179:476–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.••
    Overland EA, Vatten LJ, Eskild A. Pregnancy week at delivery and the risk of shoulder dystocia: a population study of 2 014 956 deliveries. BJOG. 2014;121:34–42. This large retrospective cohort study provided relevant information about the risk of shoulder dystocia according with infant birth weight classes.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Durnwald C, Huston-Presley L, Amini S, et al. Evaluation of body composition of large-for-gestational-age infants of women with gestational diabetes mellitus compared with women with normal glucose tolerance levels. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191:804–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Catalano PM, Thomas A, Huston-Presley L, et al. Increased fetal adiposity: a very sensitive marker of abnormal in utero development. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003;189:1698–704.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Pearson DW, Kernaghan D, Lee R, et al. The relationship between pre-pregnancy care and early pregnancy loss, major congenital anomaly or perinatal death in type I diabetes mellitus. BJOG. 2007;114:104–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Fretts RC, Boyd ME, Usher RH, et al. The changing pattern of fetal death, 1961-1988. Obstet Gynecol. 1992;79:35–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Lauenborg J, Mathiesen E, Ovesen P, et al. Audit on stillbirths in women with pregestational type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2003;26:1385–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.••
    Tennant PW, Glinianaia SV, Bilous RW, et al. Pre-existing diabetes, maternal glycated haemoglobin, and the risks of fetal and infant death: a population-based study. Diabetologia. 2014;57:285–94. This large retrospective cohort study found that pre-existing diabetes is associated with a significant increased risk of fetal death, the effect of which is largely influenced by glycemic control.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Seeds JW, Peng TCC. Does augmented growth impose an increased risk of fetal death? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;183:316–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Colstrup M, Mathiesen ER, Damm P, et al. Pregnancy in women with type 1 diabetes: have the goals of St. Vincent declaration been met concerning fetal and neonatal complications? Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2013;26:1682–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Graves CR. Antepartum fetal surveillance and timing of delivery in the pregnancy complicated by diabetes mellitus. Clin Obst Gynecol. 2007;50:1007–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Pedersen LM, Perdersen J. Causes of perinatal death in diabetic pregnancy: a clinico-pathological analysis. Acta Med Scand Suppl. 1967;476:175--181.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Evers IM, Nikkelsb PGJ, Sikkemaa J, et al. Placental pathology in women with type 1 diabetes and in a control group with normal and large-for-gestational-age infants. Placenta. 2003;24:819–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Daskalakis G, Marinopoulos S, Krielesi V, et al. Placental pathology in women with gestational diabetes. Acta Obst Gynecol Scand. 2008;87:403–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Dudley DJ. Diabetic-associated stillbirth: incidence, pathophysiology, and prevention. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2007;34:293–307.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Silver RM, Varner MW, Reddy U, et al. Work-up of stillbirth: a review of the evidence. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;196:433–44.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Horvath K, Koch K, Jeitler K, et al. Effects of treatment in women with gestational diabetes mellitus: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2010;340:c1395.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Landon MB, Spong CY, Thom E, et al. A multicenter, randomized trial of treatment for mild gestational diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:1339–48.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Crowther CA, Hiller JE, Moss JR, et al. Effect of treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus on pregnancy outcomes. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:2477–86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    O’Sullivan JB, Gellis SS, Dandrow RV, et al. The potential diabetic and her treatment in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 1966;27:683–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.••
    Rosenstein MG, Cheng YW, Snowden YM, et al. The risk of stillbirth and infant death stratified by gestational age in women with gestational diabetes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206:309e.1--7. This large retrospective cohort study provided information about the risk of fetal death in GDM pregnancies according with gestational age at term.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Ali S, Dornhorst A. Diabetes in pregnancy: health risks and management. Postgrad Med J. 2011;87:417–27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Kjos SL, Henry OA, Montoro M, Buchanan TA, et al. Insulin-requiring diabetes in pregnancy: a randomized trial of active induction of labor and expectant management. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1993;169:611–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Boulvain M, Stan CM, Irion O. Elective delivery in diabetic pregnant women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001;2, CD001997.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Nicholson WK, Wilson LM, Witkop CT, et al. Therapeutic management, delivery, and postpartum risk assessment and screening in gestational diabetes. Evid Rep Technol Assess. 2008;162:1–96.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Witkop CT, Neale D, Wilson LM, et al. Active compared with expectant delivery management in women with gestational diabetes: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;113:206–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Rayburn WF, Sokkary N, Clokey DE, et al. Consequences of routine delivery at 38 weeks for A-2 gestational diabetes. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2005;18:333–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Lurie S, Matzkel A, Weissman A, Gotlibe Z, Friedman A. Outcome of pregnancy in class A1 and A2 gestational diabetic patients delivered beyond 40 weeks' gestation. Am J Perinatol. 1992;9:484–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Lurie S, Insler V, Hagay ZJ. Induction of labor at 38 to 39 weeks of gestation reduces the incidence of shoulder dystocia in gestational diabetic patients class A2. Am J Perinatol. 1996;13:293–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Conway DL, Langer O. Elective delivery of infants with macrosomia in diabetic women: reduced shoulder dystocia vs increased cesarean deliveries. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1998;178:922–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Peled Y, Perri T, Chen R, et al. Gestational diabetes mellitus-implications of different treatment protocols. J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab. 2004;17:847–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Yogev Y, Ben-Haroush A, Chena R, et al. Active induction management of labor for diabetic pregnancies at term: mode of delivery and fetal outcome—a single center experience. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2004;114:166–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.••
    Stock SJ, Duffy A, Ford I. Outcomes of elective induction of labor compared with expectant management: population based study. BMJ. 2012;344:e2838. The results of this large retrospective large cohort study on singleton pregnancies indicated that elective induction of labor at term can reduce perinatal mortality without increasing the risk of operative delivery.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.••
    Cheng Y, Sparks T, Laros Jr R, Nicholson J, et al. Impending macrosomia: will induction of labor modify the risk of caesarean delivery? BJOG. 2012;119:402–9. This large retrospective cohort study found that induction of labor at term may reduce the risk of caesarean delivery. This finding was clinically relevant for those cases who were induced at 39 weeks and who delivered a neonate with a birthweight of 4000 ± 125 g.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.•
    Wood S, Cooper S, Ross S. Does induction of labor increase the risk of caesarean section? A systematic review and meta-analysis of trials in women with intact membranes. BJOG. 2013. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.12328. This meta-analysis provided the evidence that induction of labor in women might reduce the risk of cesarean section in both post-term pregnancies and labors induced for other high risk conditions.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Sanchez-Ramos L, Bernstein S, Kaunitz AM. Expectant management vs labor induction for suspected fetal macrosomia: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2002;100:997–1002.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.•
    Coustan DR. Gestational diabetes mellitus. Clin Chem. 2013;59:1310–21. This review focused on screening, diagnosis and management of GDM, providing clinically relevant information based on the expert view.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    ACOG Practice Bulletin. Clinical Management Guidelines for Obstetrician-Gynecologists. Number 60. Pregestational diabetes mellitus. ACOG Committee on Practice Bulletins. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;105:675–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.•
    ACOG Practice Bulletin. Clinical Management Guidelines for Obstetrician-Gynecologists. Number 137. Gestational diabetes mellitus. ACOG Committee on Practice Bulletins. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;122(Part 1):406–16. This is the most recent guideline on management of GDM.Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    ACOG Practice Bulletin. Clinical Management Guidelines for Obstetrician-Gynecologists. Number 30. Gestational diabetes mellitus. ACOG Committee on Practice Bulletins. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;98:525–38.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. NICE Clinical Guideline 63: diabetes in pregnancy. Management of diabetes and its complications from pre-conception to the postnatal period. London: NICE; 2008.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Shoulder Dystocia. Green-Top Guideline No. 42. London: RCOG Press; 2012.Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Hoffman L, Nolan C, Wilson JD, et al. Gestational diabetes mellitus-management guidelines. The Australasian diabetes in pregnancy society". Med J Aust. 1998;69:93–7.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Metzger BE, Buchanan TA, Coustan DR, et al. Summary and recommendations of the Fifth International Workshop-Conference on Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. Diabetes Care. 2007;30(Suppl2):s251–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Greuter MJ, van Emmerik NM, Wouters MA, et al. Quality of guidelines on the management of diabetes in pregnancy: a systematic review. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2012;12:58.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Elkins D, Taylor JS. Evidence-based strategies for managing gestational diabetes in women with obesity. Nurs Womens Health. 2013;17:420–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.•
    Alberico S, Montico M, Barresi V, et al. The role of gestational diabetes, pre-pregnancy body mass index and gestational weight gain on the risk of newborn macrosomia: results from a prospective multicenter study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014;14:23. This prospective study on roughly 15,000 deliveries found that maternal obesity, gestational weight gain excess, and diabetes should be considered as independent risk factors for newborn macrosomia.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.••
    Persson M, Pasupathy D, Hanson U, et al. Pre-pregnancy body mass index and risk of adverse outcome in type 1 diabetic pregnancies: a population-based cohort study. BMJ Open. 2012;2:e000601. Results of this prospective population-based cohort study indicated that BMI is an important risk factor for adverse outcome in type 1 diabetic pregnancies. The combined effect of both T1DM and overweight or obesity constitutes the greatest risk.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.•
    Simmons D. Diabetes and obesity. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2011;25:25–36. This review provided information about obesity and diabetes in pregnancy that have independent and additive effects on obstetric complications, both requiring specific management during pregnancy.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.••
    Tennant PWG, Rankin J, Bell R. Maternal body mass index and the risk of fetal and infant death: a cohort study from the North of England. Hum Reprod. 2011;26:1501–11. This large cohort study found that early pregnancy obesity is significantly associated with perinatal mortality, independent of the known relationships with congenital anomalies and maternal pregestational diabetes.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Sheiner E, Levy A, Menes TS, Silverberg D, et al. Maternal obesity as an independent risk factor for caesarean delivery. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2004;18:196–201.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Vahration A, Zhang J, Troendle JF, et al. Maternal pre-pregnancy overweight and obesity and the pattern of labor progression in term nulliparous women. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104:943–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.••
    Hirshberg A, Levine LD, Srinivas S. Labor length among overweight and obese women undergoing induction of labor. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014. [In press]. This retrospective cohort study on term inductions found an association between BMI and labor length. BMI also influences the stage of labor in which a cesarean occurs. Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Wolfe KB, Rossi RA, Warshak CR. The effect of maternal obesity on the rate of failed induction of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;205:128.e1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Gunatilake RP, Smrtka MP, Harris B, et al. Predictors of failed trial of labor among women with an extremely obese body mass index. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;209(562):e1–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Yogev Y, Ben-Haroush A, Chen R, et al. Diurnal glycemic profile in obese and normal weight nondiabetic pregnant women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191:949–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Langer O. A spectrum of glucose thresholds may effectively prevent complications in the pregnant diabetic patient. Semin Perinatol. 2002;26:196–205.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    de Veciana M, Major CA, Morgan MA, et al. Postprandial vs preprandial blood glucose monitoring in women with gestational diabetes mellitus requiring insulin therapy. N Eng J Med. 1995;333:1237–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    González-Quintero VH, Istwan NB, Rhea DJ, et al. The impact of glycemic control on neonatal outcome in singleton pregnancies complicated by gestational diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2007;30:467–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Thompson D, Capes S, Feig DS, et al. Canadian Diabetes Association Clinical Practice Guidelines Expert Committee. Diabetes and Pregnancy. In Canadian Diabetes Association 2008. Clinical practice guideline for the prevention and management of diabetes in Canada. Can J Diabetes 2008, 32(Suppl.1): S168--S180.Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Jovanovič L. The importance of preconception care in women with pre-existing diabetes. Curr Diab Pract. 2006;6:1–4.Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Evers IM, de Valk HW, Visser GH. Risk of complications of pregnancy in women with type 1 diabetes: nationwide prospective study in the Netherlands. BMJ. 2004;328:915–8.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Blackwell SC, Hassan SS, Wolfe HW, et al. Why are cesarean delivery rates so high in diabetic pregnancies? J Perinat Med. 2000;28:316–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Moses RG, Knights SJ, Lucas EM, et al. Gestational diabetes: is a higher cesarean section rate inevitable? Diabetes Care. 2000;23:15–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Takoudes TC, Weitzen S, Slocum J, et al. Risk of cesarean wound complications in diabetic gestations. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191:958–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Myles TD, Gooch J, Santolaya J. Obesity as an independent risk factor for infectious morbidity in patients who undergo cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2002;100:959–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Davies GA, Maxwell C, McLeod L, et al. SOGC clinical practice guidelines: obesity in pregnancy. No. 239. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2010;110:167–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Laughon SK, Zhang J, Troendle J, Sun L, Reddy UM. Using a simplified Bishop score to predict vaginal delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;117:805–11.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.••
    Maso G, Alberico S, Wiesenfeld U, et al. GINEXMAL RCT: induction of labor vs expectant management in gestational diabetes pregnancies. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2011;11:31. The present trial will provide evidence as to whether or not, in women affected by gestational diabetes, induction of labor at 38–39 weeks is an effective management to ameliorate maternal and neonatal outcomes.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Chauhan SP, Ananth CV. Induction of labor in the United States: a critical appraisal of appropriateness and reducibility. Semin Perinatol. 2012;36:336–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Fitzpatrick KE, Sellers S, Spark P, et al. Incidence and risk factors for placenta accreta/increta/percreta in the UK: a national case-control study. PLoS One. 2012;7:e52893.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Silver RM. Implications of the first cesarean: perinatal and future reproductive health and subsequent cesareans, placentation issues, uterine rupture risk, morbidity, and mortality. Semin Perinatol. 2012;36:315–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gianpaolo Maso
    • 1
  • Monica Piccoli
    • 1
  • Sara Parolin
    • 1
  • Stefano Restaino
    • 1
  • Salvatore Alberico
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyInstitute for Maternal and Child Health – IRCCS Burlo GarofoloTriesteItaly

Personalised recommendations