Comparison of Ultrasound Findings Associated with Adverse Fetal, Obstetric, and Neonatal Outcomes in Pregestational Type 1 And Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Objective We aimed to summarize the available evidence examining the association between prenatal ultrasound findings and adverse fetal, obstetric, and neonatal outcomes in pregnancies complicated by type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and to evaluate whether the predictive value of ultrasound findings for adverse outcomes varies between T1DM and T2DM pregnancies.

Study Design We conducted a systematic review of the existing literature through August 12, 2024. We included articles in English that reported associations between ultrasound findings and fetal, obstetric, and neonatal outcomes in pregnant people with T1DM and T2DM. The primary outcome of interest was stillbirth; secondary outcomes were neonatal demise, neonatal intensive care unit admission, neonatal hypoglycemia, respiratory distress syndrome, polycythemia, hyperbilirubinemia, organomegaly, electrolyte disturbances, shoulder dystocia, permanent brachial plexus injury, cord gas, Apgar scores, large for gestational age (LGA), small for gestational age (SGA), and preterm birth. Two independent reviewers examined articles at the abstract level and, if eligible, at the full-text level; disagreements were adjudicated by a third reviewer.

Results Of the 2,088 unique citations reviewed, 12 studies met the inclusion criteria describing associations between ultrasound findings and fetal, obstetric, and neonatal outcomes among a total of 1,165 pregnant people with T1DM and 489 pregnant people with T2DM. Most studies (10/12) examined the association between ultrasound measures of growth, including estimated fetal weight and its individual components, abdominal wall thickness, head circumference to abdominal circumference ratio, and birth weight, LGA or SGA. Studies did not examine stillbirth, neonatal demise, or maternal outcomes other than cesarean section.

Conclusion This systematic review synthesizes the available literature on ultrasound risk markers of adverse fetal, obstetric, and neonatal outcomes separately in pregnant people with T1DM and T2DM. We identified very few studies that distinguished between pregnant people with T1DM and T2DM, and the majority focused on surrogate outcomes (e.g., LGA, SGA) of morbidity. Our findings highlight the need for further studies investigating these distinct diseases to provide evidence for antenatal management recommendations.

Key Points

• This systematic review compares ultrasound risk markers for adverse outcomes in pregnancies with T1DM and T2DM.

• Few studies compare ultrasound risk markers for adverse outcomes among pregnancies with T1DM and T2DM.

• Additional targeted studies to inform antenatal ultrasound care are necessary.

Keywords

ultrasound - pregestational diabetes - type 1 diabetes - type 2 diabetes - adverse outcomes

Publication History

Received: 25 April 2024

Accepted: 11 September 2024

Accepted Manuscript online:
13 September 2024

Article published online:
29 October 2024

• References

• 1 Peterson C, Grosse SD, Li R. et al. Preventable health and cost burden of adverse birth outcomes associated with pregestational diabetes in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2015; 212 (01) 74.e1-74.e9
• 2 Murphy HR, Howgate C, O'Keefe J. et al; National Pregnancy in Diabetes (NPID) advisory group. Characteristics and outcomes of pregnant women with type 1 or type 2 diabetes: a 5-year national population-based cohort study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2021; 9 (03) 153-164
• 3 Hammoud NM, Visser GH, Peters SA, Graatsma EM, Pistorius L, de Valk HW. Fetal growth profiles of macrosomic and non-macrosomic infants of women with pregestational or gestational diabetes. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013; 41 (04) 390-397
• 4 Bennett SN, Tita A, Owen J, Biggio JR, Harper LM. Assessing White's classification of pregestational diabetes in a contemporary diabetic population. Obstet Gynecol 2015; 125 (05) 1217-1223
• 5 Berger H, Melamed N, Davis BM. et al. Impact of diabetes, obesity and hypertension on preterm birth: population-based study. PLoS One 2020; 15 (03) e0228743
• 6 Remsberg KE, McKeown RE, McFarland KF, Irwin LS. Diabetes in pregnancy and cesarean delivery. Diabetes Care 1999; 22 (09) 1561-1567
• 7 Battarbee AN, Sandoval G, Grobman WA. et al; Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units (MFMU) Network. Antenatal corticosteroids and preterm neonatal morbidity and mortality among women with and without diabetes in pregnancy. Am J Perinatol 2022; 39 (01) 67-74
• 8 Demarini S, Mimouni F, Tsang RC, Khoury J, Hertzberg V. Impact of metabolic control of diabetes during pregnancy on neonatal hypocalcemia: a randomized study. Obstet Gynecol 1994; 83 (06) 918-922
• 9 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' Committee on Practice Bulletins—Obstetrics. ACOG practice bulletin no. 201: pregestational diabetes mellitus. Obstet Gynecol 2018; 132 (06) e228-e248
• 10 Aguilera J, Semmler J, Coronel C. et al. Paired maternal and fetal cardiac functional measurements in women with gestational diabetes mellitus at 35-36 weeks' gestation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2020; 223 (04) 574.e1-574.e15
• 11 Cyganek K, Skupien J, Katra B. et al. Risk of macrosomia remains glucose-dependent in a cohort of women with pregestational type 1 diabetes and good glycemic control. Endocrine 2017; 55 (02) 447-455
• 12 Yanit KE, Snowden JM, Cheng YW, Caughey AB. The impact of chronic hypertension and pregestational diabetes on pregnancy outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012; 207 (04) 333.e1-333.e6
• 13 Idris N, Wong SF, Thomae M, Gardener G, McIntyre DH. Influence of polyhydramnios on perinatal outcome in pregestational diabetic pregnancies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2010; 36 (03) 338-343
• 14 Landon MB, Gabbe SG. Fetal surveillance and timing of delivery in pregnancy complicated by diabetes mellitus. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 1996; 23 (01) 109-123
• 15 Powers ACNK, Evans-Molina C. Diabetes mellitus: diagnosis, classifications, and pathophysiology. Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine. 20 ed.. McGraw Hill Education; 2018
• 16 Balsells M, García-Patterson A, Gich I, Corcoy R. Maternal and fetal outcome in women with type 2 versus type 1 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and metaanalysis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2009; 94 (11) 4284-4291
• 17 Knight KM, Thornburg LL, Pressman EK. Pregnancy outcomes in type 2 diabetic patients as compared with type 1 diabetic patients and nondiabetic controls. J Reprod Med 2012; 57 (9-10): 397-404
• 18 Murphy HR, Steel SA, Roland JM. et al; East Anglia Study Group for Improving Pregnancy Outcomes in Women with Diabetes (EASIPOD). Obstetric and perinatal outcomes in pregnancies complicated by Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes: influences of glycaemic control, obesity and social disadvantage. Diabet Med 2011; 28 (09) 1060-1067
• 19 Owens LA, Sedar J, Carmody L, Dunne F. Comparing type 1 and type 2 diabetes in pregnancy- similar conditions or is a separate approach required?. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2015; 15: 69
• 20 ACOG practice bulletin no. 190: gestational diabetes mellitus. Obstet Gynecol 2018; 131 (02) e49-e64
• 21 Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group P. PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151 (04) 264-269 , W64
• 22 Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC. et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA 2000; 283 (15) 2008-2012
• 23 Wells GASB, O'Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V, Losos M, Tugwell P. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute; 2021. https://ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp
• 24 Bollepalli S, Dolan LM, Miodovnik M, Feghali M, Khoury JC. Asymmetric large-for-gestational-age infants of type 1 diabetic women: morbidity and abdominal growth. Am J Perinatol 2010; 27 (08) 603-610
• 25 Dude AM, Yee LM. Identifying fetal growth disorders using ultrasonography in women with diabetes. J Ultrasound Med 2018; 37 (05) 1103-1108
• 26 Gasiorowska A, Zawiejska A, Dydowicz P. et al. Maternal factors, ultrasound and placental function parameters in early pregnancy as predictors of birth weight in low-risk populations and among patients with pre-gestational diabetes. Ginekol Pol 2019; 90 (07) 388-395
• 27 Gasiorowska A, Zawiejska A, Dydowicz P. et al. Mid-trimester ultrasound parameters for predicting birth weight in low risk pregnancies vs high-risk pregnancies complicated with pre-gestational diabetes mellitus. Ginekol Pol 2020; 91 (04) 216-222
• 28 Gibbons A, Flatley C, Kumar S. The fetal cerebro-placental ratio in diabetic pregnancies is influenced more by the umbilical artery rather than middle cerebral artery pulsatility index. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2017; 211: 56-61
• 29 Isabey EP, Pylypjuk CL. The relationship between fetal abdominal wall thickness and intrapartum complications amongst mothers with pregestational type 2 diabetes. J Diabetes Res 2021; 2021: 5544599
• 30 Jaeggi ET, Fouron JC, Proulx F. Fetal cardiac performance in uncomplicated and well-controlled maternal type I diabetes. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001; 17 (04) 311-315
• 31 Maruotti GM, Rizzo G, Sirico A. et al. Are there any relationships between umbilical artery Pulsatility Index and macrosomia in fetuses of type I diabetic mothers?. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2014; 27 (17) 1776-1781
• 32 Secher AL, Bytoft B, Tabor A, Damm P, Mathiesen ER. Fetal sonographic characteristics associated with shoulder dystocia in pregnancies of women with type 1 diabetes. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2015; 94 (10) 1105-1111
• 33 Kainer F, Weiss PA, Hüttner U, Haas J. Ultrasound growth parameters in relation to levels of amniotic fluid insulin in women with diabetes type-I. Early Hum Dev 1997; 49 (02) 113-121
• 34 Rathcke SL, Sinding MM, Christensen TT. et al. Prediction of large-for-gestational-age at birth using fetal biometry in type 1 and type 2 diabetes: a retrospective cohort study. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2024;
• 35 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' Committee on Obstetric Practice, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Medically indicated late-preterm and early-term deliveries: ACOG Committee opinion, number 831. Obstet Gynecol 2021; 138 (01) e35-e39
• 36 Indications for outpatient antenatal fetal surveillance: ACOG Committee opinion, number 828. Obstet Gynecol 2021; 137 (06) e177-e197
• 37 Modanlou HD, Komatsu G, Dorchester W, Freeman RK, Bosu SK. Large-for-gestational-age neonates: anthropometric reasons for shoulder dystocia. Obstet Gynecol 1982; 60 (04) 417-423