Inverse association between 1,5-anhydroglucitol and neonatal diabetic complications
- 43 Downloads
A glycemic control marker to predict neonatal diabetic complications is unavailable. We aimed to examine if 1,5-anhydroglucitol (1,5-AG) can predict neonatal complications in women with diabetes in pregnancy.
Prospective observational study from December 2011 to August 2013. We recruited 105 women, 70 diabetic (gestational and pregestational) and 35 nondiabetic. 1,5-AG at birth was compared between the two groups.
In the diabetic group 1,5-AG, HbA1c, and fructosamine were measured before glycemic control initiation (first visit), after 4–6 weeks (second visit), and at delivery. Women were divided to poor (1,5-AG values below median at birth) and good (1,5-AG values at median and above) glycemic control groups. Mean daily glucose charts were collected. The primary outcome was a composite of neonatal diabetic complications: respiratory distress, hypoglycemia, polycythemia, hyperbilirubinemia, and large for gestational age.
Mean 1,5-AG in the nondiabetic group was similar to that of the diabetic group without the composite outcome and was significantly higher than in the diabetic group with the composite outcome.
The rate of the composite outcome was higher in the poor glycemic control group compared with the good glycemic control group (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 3.8 95% CI [1.2–12.3]). Only 1,5-AG was inversely associated with the composite outcome at all time points; the second visit was the only independent risk factor in multivariable logistic regression (OR 0.7 95% CI 0.54–0.91). The rest of the glycemic markers were not associated with neonatal composite outcome.
1,5-AG is inversely associated with neonatal diabetic complications and is superior to other glycemic markers in predicting those complications.
Keywords1,5-anhydroglucitol Neonatal complications Hemoglobin A1c Glycemic control Gestational diabetes mellitus Pregnancy
This work was supported by the Legacy Heritage Fund.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All participants in the study gave signed an informed consent form.
- 17.A.B. Caughey, M. Turrentine, ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 190 summary: gestational diabetes mellitus. Obstet. Gynecol. 131(2), 406–408 (2018)Google Scholar
- 18.American Diabetes Association. 2. Classification and diagnosis of diabetes: standards of medical care in diabetes-2019. Diabetes Care 42(Suppl 1), S13–S28 (2019)Google Scholar
- 20.National Diabetes Data Group. Classification and diagnosis of diabetes mellitus and other categories of glucose intolerance. Diabetes 28(12), 1039–1057 (1979)Google Scholar
- 23.J.T. Roeckner, L. Sanchez-Ramos, R. Jijon-Knupp, A.M. Kaunitz, Single abnormal value on 3-hour oral glucose tolerance test during pregnancy is associated with adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 215(3), 287–297 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar