Obstetrics & Gynecology Track the topics, authors and articles important to you
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Obstetrics & Gynecology 1995;86:892-896
© 1995 by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Berkus, M.
Right arrow Articles by Luther, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Berkus, M.
Right arrow Articles by Luther, M.

Articles

Efficiency of lower threshold criteria for the diagnosis of gestational diabetes

MD Berkus, O Langer, JM Piper, and MF Luther

OBJECTIVES: To determine the incidence of adverse outcome in normal untreated gravidas with minimal hyperglycemia, classified as having gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) by threshold criteria lower than current standards; to determine how efficient the different criteria are in identifying infants at risk for morbidity; and to explore the pathophysiology of minimal hyperglycemia using the glucose tolerance test (GTT) periodicity concept. METHODS: Seven hundred eight subjects considered nondiabetic by current ACOG criteria were reclassified by the criteria of Coustan (fasting 95, 1 hour 180, 2 hours 155, and 5 hours 140 mg/dL), Sacks (96, 172, 152, and 131 mg/dL), or Langer (at least one abnormal ACOG value). Glucose tolerance test periodicity, the incidence of large for gestational age (LGA) neonates, and macrosomia were then determined for each gravida diagnosed as having GDM by these criteria. RESULTS: Both Coustan and Langer criteria identified a significantly greater incidence of LGA infants compared with non-GDM (23.6 and 25.3%, respectively, versus 14%, P < .05), and identified them as efficiently as current criteria, approximately one LGA infant for every four GDM subjects treated. The incidence of LGA did not differ between the Sacks GDM and non-GDM groups. Glucose tolerance test periodicity for newly diagnosed GDM gravidas was significantly longer than non-GDM for Coustan and Langer criteria (3.9 and 4.06 versus 3.3 hours, P < .01) but not for the Sacks criteria. CONCLUSION: Using lower threshold criteria to diagnose GDM identified morbidity at an incidence and efficiency comparable to current standards. These newly diagnosed GDM gravidas had abnormal GTT characteristics, with each group exceeding the 3.5-hour GTT periodicity limit previously found for nondiabetic gravidas. Sack's conversion of existing standards may be too low to efficiently identify pregnant subjects at risk for increased morbidity.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1995 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.