MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-six pregnant women attending the Antenatal Clinic, UMMC for their first antenatal check-up consented and were recruited for this study: 28 subjects with diseased periodontium (test group) and 28 subjects with healthy periodontium (control). The test group underwent nonsurgical periodontal therapy and the control group was given oral hygiene education. Periodontal parameters and CRP levels were evaluated at baseline and 6 weeks. Pregnancy outcome data were recorded from the Antenatal Clinic, UMMC.
RESULTS: Plasma CRP levels in the test group were statistically significantly elevated compared to the control group (8.55 ± 5.28 mg/l vs 5.66 ± 2.91 mg/l). After nonsurgical periodontal therapy, a statistically significant reduction in the CRP level in the test group (2.06 mg/l) along with statistically significant improvement in periodontal status in both groups was observed. The mean birth weight for infants of both groups showed no statistically significant difference.
CONCLUSIONS: Plasma CRP levels in pregnant women with diseased periodontium were statistically significantly reduced after nonsurgical periodontal therapy. However, no association between CRP levels and adverse pregnancy outcome was observed.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether any association exists between the finding of an increased thickness of placenta, abnormal placenta shape, placental calcification, placental lake and abnormal cord insertion site at 20-22 and 30-32 weeks gestation with an increased risk of uteroplacental complications or a poor pregnancy outcome.
METHODOLOGY: A real-time ultrasound was used at the time of detail scan (at 20-22 weeks gestation) and at 30-32 weeks gestation to look for placenta appearance, fetal growth and anomaly. The main outcome measures were risk of hypertension disease in pregnancy, fetal growth restriction and poor fetal outcomes such as low Apgar score and low cord pH.
RESULT: The majority of the participants were Malay (77.9%). Abnormal placenta found at both gestations were placental lakes and thickness, and only one case had marginal cord insertion. Approximately 6% of the cases were confirmed placenta previa. No abnormal shape or abnormal calcification found at both gestations. About 10% patient developed hypertensive disease in pregnancy, 15% of the fetus was found to have growth restriction and another 16% have low umbilical cord pH. Majority of them delivered at term (90%) and via vaginal delivery (81%). There was no significance between presence of abnormal placental lake and thickness at both gestations with the maternal and fetal outcome.
CONCLUSION: Presence of abnormal placental thickness and lakes at 30-32 weeks scan associated with maternal hypertensive disease, fetal growth restriction and low umbilical cord pH, however these were not statistically significant.
METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study done in University Hospital Fertility Clinic for one year duration. A total of 88 euthyroid women who underwent COH as part of planned in-vitro fertilization (IVF) were invited to participate in this study. Serum thyroid function of each women will be monitored before stimulation (T1), day 10-13 of cycle (T2), during oocyte retrieval (T3), one week following embryo transfer (T4), and at four weeks after embryo transfer (T5). Reproductive outcome of IVF will be observed and documented.
RESULTS: Nine women had ongoing singleton pregnancy, seven suffered from miscarriage, while the rest had implantation failure. Serum thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) and free thyroxine (fT4) increased throughout stimulation, peaking at 32-36 hours after hCG administration compared to baseline (1.250 vs. 1.740 mIU/L and 13.94 vs. 15.25 pmol/L). It remains elevated until one week following embryo transfer. The increment of serum TSH exceeded the upper limit, acceptable for first trimester (<1.60 mIU/L). However, the evolution of serum TSH and fT4 did not significantly differ with pregnancy outcome.
CONCLUSIONS: In euthyroid women, thyroid function changed significantly during COH, but these changes were not different between the three reproductive outcomes. Thus, we do not suggest continuous thyroid function monitoring during COH.
SETTING: The analysis was from the perspective of the National Health Service in England and Wales.
PARTICIPANTS: 6221 patients from four of the Hyperglycaemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes (HAPO) study centres (two UK, two Australian), 6308 patients from the Atlantic Diabetes in Pregnancy study and 12 755 patients from UK clinical practice.
PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES PLANNED: The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), net monetary benefit (NMB) and the probability of being cost-effective at CE thresholds of £20 000 and £30 000 per QALY.
RESULTS: In a population of pregnant women from the four HAPO study centres and using NICE-defined risk factors for GDM, diagnosing GDM using NICE 2015 criteria had an NMB of £239 902 (relative to no treatment) at a CE threshold of £30 000 per QALY compared with WHO 2013 criteria, which had an NMB of £186 675. NICE 2015 criteria had a 51.5% probability of being cost-effective compared with the WHO 2013 diagnostic criteria, which had a 27.6% probability of being cost-effective (no treatment had a 21.0% probability of being cost-effective). For women without NICE risk factors in this population, the NMBs for NICE 2015 and WHO 2013 criteria were both negative relative to no treatment and no treatment had a 78.1% probability of being cost-effective.
CONCLUSION: The NICE 2015 diagnostic criteria for GDM can be considered cost-effective relative to the WHO 2013 alternative at a CE threshold of £30 000 per QALY. Universal screening for GDM was not found to be cost-effective relative to screening based on NICE risk factors.
STUDY DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional comparative study in a Malaysian tertiary obstetric hospital involving 200 non-smoking pregnant women at term, of whom 100 were secondhand smokers and 100 were non-secondhand smokers. Those with multiple pregnancies, with a body mass index (BMI) of more than 30kg/m2or who delivered by Caesarean section were excluded. The participants' basic demographic details, delivery details, neonatal outcome and placental weight were recorded. Umbilical cord blood samples were obtained, and cord blood cotinine levels were measured with a Cotinine ELISA kit. The primary outcomes were baby's birth weight, length, and head circumference, Apgar score at 5min and placental weight. The secondary outcome was difference in cord blood cotinine levels between the two groups and the correlation of these differences with the neonatal outcome.
RESULTS: The secondhand smoker group had significantly lower baby weight (2.94±0.31kg vs 3.05±0.40kg), head circumference (30.87±2.35cm vs 37.13±2.36cm), length (46.58±1.95cm vs 51.53±2.05cm) and placental weight (520±73.5g vs 596±61.3g) and significantly higher cord blood cotinine levels (16.35±12.84ng/mL vs 0.56±0.22ng/mL). Cord blood cotinine levels had significant negative correlations with placental weight (r=-0.461), baby's weight (r=-0.297), baby's head circumference (r=-0.501) and baby's length (r=-0.374).
CONCLUSION: Secondhand smoke increases the incidence of adverse pregnancy outcomes (newborns'anthropometric measurements and placental weight) and causes higher cord blood cotinine levels.
OBJECTIVES: To compare techniques of blood glucose monitoring and their impact on maternal and infant outcomes among pregnant women with pre-existing diabetes.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 November 2016), searched reference lists of retrieved studies and contacted trial authors.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing techniques of blood glucose monitoring including SMBG, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) or clinic monitoring among pregnant women with pre-existing diabetes mellitus (type 1 or type 2). Trials investigating timing and frequency of monitoring were also included. RCTs using a cluster-randomised design were eligible for inclusion but none were identified.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Data were checked for accuracy. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS: This review update includes at total of 10 trials (538) women (468 women with type 1 diabetes and 70 women with type 2 diabetes). The trials took place in Europe and the USA. Five of the 10 included studies were at moderate risk of bias, four studies were at low to moderate risk of bias, and one study was at high risk of bias. The trials are too small to show differences in important outcomes such as macrosomia, preterm birth, miscarriage or death of baby. Almost all the reported GRADE outcomes were assessed as being very low-quality evidence. This was due to design limitations in the studies, wide confidence intervals, small sample sizes, and few events. In addition, there was high heterogeneity for some outcomes.Various methods of glucose monitoring were compared in the trials. Neither pooled analyses nor individual trial analyses showed any clear advantages of one monitoring technique over another for primary and secondary outcomes. Many important outcomes were not reported.1. Self-monitoring versus standard care (two studies, 43 women): there was no clear difference for caesarean section (risk ratio (RR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 1.49; one study, 28 women) or glycaemic control (both very low-quality), and not enough evidence to assess perinatal mortality and neonatal mortality and morbidity composite. Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, large-for-gestational age, neurosensory disability, and preterm birth were not reported in either study.2. Self-monitoring versus hospitalisation (one study, 100 women): there was no clear difference for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (pre-eclampsia and hypertension) (RR 4.26, 95% CI 0.52 to 35.16; very low-quality: RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.08 to 2.22; very low-quality). There was no clear difference in caesarean section or preterm birth less than 37 weeks' gestation (both very low quality), and the sample size was too small to assess perinatal mortality (very low-quality). Large-for-gestational age, mortality or morbidity composite, neurosensory disability and preterm birth less than 34 weeks were not reported.3. Pre-prandial versus post-prandial glucose monitoring (one study, 61 women): there was no clear difference between groups for caesarean section (RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.92 to 2.28; very low-quality), large-for-gestational age (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.85; very low-quality) or glycaemic control (very low-quality). The results for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: pre-eclampsia and perinatal mortality are not meaningful because these outcomes were too rare to show differences in a small sample (all very low-quality). The study did not report the outcomes mortality or morbidity composite, neurosensory disability or preterm birth.4. Automated telemedicine monitoring versus conventional system (three studies, 84 women): there was no clear difference for caesarean section (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.48; one study, 32 women; very low-quality), and mortality or morbidity composite in the one study that reported these outcomes. There were no clear differences for glycaemic control (very low-quality). No studies reported hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, large-for-gestational age, perinatal mortality (stillbirth and neonatal mortality), neurosensory disability or preterm birth.5.CGM versus intermittent monitoring (two studies, 225 women): there was no clear difference for pre-eclampsia (RR 1.37, 95% CI 0.52 to 3.59; low-quality), caesarean section (average RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.54; I² = 62%; very low-quality) and large-for-gestational age (average RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.92; I² = 82%; very low-quality). Glycaemic control indicated by mean maternal HbA1c was lower for women in the continuous monitoring group (mean difference (MD) -0.60 %, 95% CI -0.91 to -0.29; one study, 71 women; moderate-quality). There was not enough evidence to assess perinatal mortality and there were no clear differences for preterm birth less than 37 weeks' gestation (low-quality). Mortality or morbidity composite, neurosensory disability and preterm birth less than 34 weeks were not reported.6. Constant CGM versus intermittent CGM (one study, 25 women): there was no clear difference between groups for caesarean section (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.79; very low-quality), glycaemic control (mean blood glucose in the 3rd trimester) (MD -0.14 mmol/L, 95% CI -2.00 to 1.72; very low-quality) or preterm birth less than 37 weeks' gestation (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.08 to 15.46; very low-quality). Other primary (hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, large-for-gestational age, perinatal mortality (stillbirth and neonatal mortality), mortality or morbidity composite, and neurosensory disability) or GRADE outcomes (preterm birth less than 34 weeks' gestation) were not reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review found no evidence that any glucose monitoring technique is superior to any other technique among pregnant women with pre-existing type 1 or type 2 diabetes. The evidence base for the effectiveness of monitoring techniques is weak and additional evidence from large well-designed randomised trials is required to inform choices of glucose monitoring techniques.