SummaryBackgroundPregnant women with type 1 diabetes are a high-risk population who are recommended to strive for optimal glucose control, but neonatal outcomes attributed to maternal hyperglycaemia remain suboptimal. Our aim was to examine the effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) on maternal glucose control and obstetric and neonatal health outcomes.MethodsIn this multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial, we recruited women aged 18–40 years with type 1 diabetes for a minimum of 12 months who were receiving intensive insulin therapy. Participants were pregnant (≤13 weeks and 6 days' gestation) or planning pregnancy from 31 hospitals in Canada, England, Scotland, Spain, Italy, Ireland, and the USA. We ran two trials in parallel for pregnant participants and for participants planning pregnancy. In both trials, participants were randomly assigned to either CGM in addition to capillary glucose monitoring or capillary glucose monitoring alone. Randomisation was stratified by insulin delivery (pump or injections) and baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c). The primary outcome was change in HbA1c from randomisation to 34 weeks' gestation in pregnant women and to 24 weeks or conception in women planning pregnancy, and was assessed in all randomised participants with baseline assessments. Secondary outcomes included obstetric and neonatal health outcomes, assessed with all available data without imputation. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01788527.FindingsBetween March 25, 2013, and March 22, 2016, we randomly assigned 325 women (215 pregnant, 110 planning pregnancy) to capillary glucose monitoring with CGM (108 pregnant and 53 planning pregnancy) or without (107 pregnant and 57 planning pregnancy). We found a small difference in HbA1c in pregnant women using CGM (mean difference −0·19%; 95% CI −0·34 to −0·03; p=0·0207). Pregnant CGM users spent more time in target (68% vs 61%; p=0·0034) and less time hyperglycaemic (27% vs 32%; p=0·0279) than did pregnant control participants, with comparable severe hypoglycaemia episodes (18 CGM and 21 control) and time spent hypoglycaemic (3% vs 4%; p=0·10). Neonatal health outcomes were significantly improved, with lower incidence of large for gestational age (odds ratio 0·51, 95% CI 0·28 to 0·90; p=0·0210), fewer neonatal intensive care admissions lasting more than 24 h (0·48; 0·26 to 0·86; p=0·0157), fewer incidences of neonatal hypoglycaemia (0·45; 0·22 to 0·89; p=0·0250), and 1-day shorter length of hospital stay (p=0·0091). We found no apparent benefit of CGM in women planning pregnancy. Adverse events occurred in 51 (48%) of CGM participants and 43 (40%) of control participants in the pregnancy trial, and in 12 (27%) of CGM participants and 21 (37%) of control participants in the planning pregnancy trial. Serious adverse events occurred in 13 (6%) participants in the pregnancy trial (eight [7%] CGM, five [5%] control) and in three (3%) participants in the planning pregnancy trial (two [4%] CGM and one [2%] control). The most...

Treating GDM results in less preeclampsia, shoulder dystocia, and macrosomia; however, current evidence does not show an effect on neonatal hypoglycemia or future poor metabolic outcomes. There is little evidence of short-term harm of treating GDM other than an increased demand for services.

All women with pre-existing type 1 or type 2 diabetes should receive preconception care to optimize glycemic control, assess for complications, review medications and begin folic acid supplementation.• All pregnant women without known pre-existing diabetes should be screened for gestational diabetes between 24 to 28 weeks of pregnancy • If you were diagnosed with gestational diabetes during your pregnancy, it is important to:• Breastfeed immediately after birth and for a minimum of 4 months in order to prevent hypoglycemia in your newborn, obesity in childhood, and diabetes for both you and your childConflict of interest statements can be found on page S274.Can J Diabetes 42 (2018) S255-S282

Our review found that metformin had no short-term adverse effects on pregnancy, potential benefits in the neonatal period, but limited long-term follow-up information. Prior to routine use, we recommend further follow-up studies of offspring exposed to metformin in utero.

To compare glycemic control, quality of life, and pregnancy outcomes of women using insulin pumps and multiple daily injection therapy (MDI) during the Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Women With Type 1 Diabetes in Pregnancy Trial (CONCEPTT). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS This was a prespecified analysis of CONCEPTT involving 248 pregnant women from 31 centers. Randomization was stratified for pump versus MDI and HbA 1c. The primary outcome was change in HbA 1c from randomization to 34 weeks' gestation. Key secondary outcomes were continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) measures, maternal-infant health, and patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS At baseline, pump users were more often in stable relationships (P = 0.003), more likely to take preconception vitamins (P = 0.03), and less likely to smoke (P = 0.02). Pump and MDI users had comparable first-trimester glycemia: HbA 1c 6.84 6 0.71 vs. 6.95 6 0.58% (51 6 7.8 vs. 52 6 6.3 mmol/mol) (P = 0.31) and CGM time in target (51 6 14 vs. 50 6 13%) (P = 0.40). At 34 weeks, MDI users had a greater decrease in HbA 1c (20.55 6 0.59 vs. 20.32 6 0.65%, P = 0.001). At 24 and 34 weeks, MDI users were more likely to achieve target HbA 1c (P = 0.009 and P = 0.001, respectively). Pump users had more hypertensive disorders (P = 0.011), mainly driven by increased gestational hypertension (14.4 vs. 5.2%; P = 0.025), and more neonatal hypoglycemia (31.8 vs. 19.1%, P = 0.05) and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admissions >24 h (44.5 vs. 29.6%; P = 0.02). Pump users had a larger reduction in hypoglycemia-related anxiety (P = 0.05) but greater decline in health/well-being (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS In CONCEPTT, MDI users were more likely to have better glycemic outcomes and less likely to have gestational hypertension, neonatal hypoglycemia, and NICU admissions than pump users. These data suggest that implementation of insulin pump therapy is potentially suboptimal during pregnancy.

No abstract

(Lancet 2017;390:2347–2359) Pregnant women with type 1 diabetes are at increased risk of preeclampsia, cesarean delivery, congenital anomalies, and other adverse pregnancy outcomes. While optimal glycemic control during pregnancy can improve outcomes, it is difficult to accomplish due to the complexity of insulin dose adjustments, changes in insulin sensitivity, and variability of insulin absorption that all occur during pregnancy. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has been successful at improving glycemic control in nonpregnant women but studies in pregnant women have had conflicting results. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of CGM in women with type 1 diabetes who were pregnant or planning to become pregnant.

The OGCT and fasting plasma glucose level (at a threshold of 4.7 mmol/L [85 mg/dL]) by 24 weeks' gestation are good at identifying women who do not have GDM. The OGCT is better at identifying women who have GDM. The OGCT has not been validated for the IADPSG diagnostic criteria.