Diagnosis of gestational diabetes: Are five rounds of blood sampling necessary?
Open accessAbstract
We aimed to determine the upper and lower cutoff values to simplify the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). We investigated the 50-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) results from 1441 pregnancies and identified 423 gravidas who underwent the 100-g OGTT from 2011 to 2019. We collected the results of 50- and 100-g OGTTs. Moreover, we obtained the sum of the 50-g OGTT and 0-hour values, and the sum of those levels and 1-hour values. We determined the upper cutoff at 50-g OGTT, 0-, 1-hour, sum of 50-g OGTT and 0-hour results, and sum of those levels and 1-hour results for the confirmation of GDM. Also, we determined the lower cutoff at these tests for the exclusion of GDM. The upper cutoffs in 50-g OGTT, 0-, 1-hour, the sum of 50-g OGTT and 0-hour were 222, 115, 212, and 315 mg/dL, respectively. The lower cutoffs in 50-g OGTT, 0-, 1-hour, the sum of 50-g OGTT and 0-hour were 131, 65, 151, and 208 mg/dL, respectively. In addition, we discovered that the upper and lower cutoffs in the sum of 50-g OGTT, 0- and 1-hour values were >516 and <373 mg/dL, respectively. We implemented these cutoffs to our study group at 50-g OGTT and 0-, 1-hour of 100-g OGTT. It could omit 2- and 3-hour sampling in 216 gravidas (51.1%). Our approach was able to simplify GDM diagnostic steps in half of our study group.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In South Korea, Cha et al. in 2022 analyzed 1441 pregnant women using two-step ACOG approach; 93 out of 423 (22%) in the group were diagnosed with GDM according to C&C criteria.
“A total of 93 out of 423 (22%) in this group were diagnosed with GDM according to the C&C criteria.”
From Evolution of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus across Continents in 21st Century (2022) · cites this paper as [223]
In South Korea, Cha et al. proposed a 12.3 mmol/L (222 mg/dL) level in the 50 g OGTT as the upper cutoff for omission of the 100 g OGTT.
“The scientists proposed a 12.3 mmol/L (222 mg/dL) level in the 50 g OGTT [223].”
From Evolution of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus across Continents in 21st Century (2022) · cites this paper as [223]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 190: Gestational Diabetes Mellitus
(2018) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000002501 · Cited by 1,820 · see citing works
van Gemert, T. E., Moses, R. G., Pape, A. V., & Morris, G. J. (2020) · Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology · doi:10.1111/ajo.13203 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 16
- [1]Johns EC Denison FC Norman JE Reynolds RM. Gestational diabetes mellitus: mechanisms, treatment, and complications. Trends Endocrinol Metab 2018; 29: 743– 54. 30297319
- [2]Seshiah V Balaji V Balaji MS. Gestational diabetes mellitus manifests in all trimesters of pregnancy. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2007; 77: 482– 4. 17292506
- [3]Gojnic M Stefanovic T Perovic M. Prediction of fetal macrosomia with ultrasound parameters and maternal glycemic controls in gestational diabetes mellitus. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol 2012; 39: 512– 5. 23444756
- [4]Perović M Garalejić E Gojnić M. Sensitivity and specificity of ultrasonography as a screening tool for gestational diabetes mellitus. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2012; 25: 1348– 53. 22117121
- [5]Li-Zhen L Yun X Xiao-Dong Z. Evaluation of guidelines on the screening and diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus: systematic review. BMJ Open 2019; 9: e023014. PMC6502228 31061012
- [7]Lachmann EH Fox RA Dennison RA Usher-Smith JA Meek CL Aiken CE. Barriers to completing oral glucose tolerance testing in women at risk of gestational diabetes. Diabet Med 2020; 37: 1482– 9. 32144795 PMC8641378
- [8]Jacobi P Solt I Weissman A. A 2 hour versus the 3-hour 100 g glucose tolerance test for diagnosing gestational diabetes mellitus. J Perinatal Med 2004; 32: 320– 2. 15346816
- [9]Landy HJ Gómez-Marín O O'Sullivan MJ. Diagnosing gestational diabetes mellitus: use of a glucose screen without administering the glucose tolerance test. Obstet Gynecol 1996; 87: 395– 400. 8598962
- [10]Bobrowski RA Bottoms SF Micallef JA Dombrowski MP. Is the 50-gram glucose screening test ever diagnostic? J Matern Fetal Med 1996; 5: 317– 20. 8972407
- [11]Cheng YW Esakoff TF Block-Kurbisch I Ustinov A Shafer S Caughey AB. Screening or diagnostic: markedly elevated glucose loading test and perinatal outcomes. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2006; 19: 729– 34. 17127496
- [12]Cha HH Kim JY Choi SJ Oh SY Roh CR Kim JH. How high is too high in cutoff levels from 50-g glucose challenge test. Obstet Gynecol Sci 2016; 59: 178– 83. 27200307 PMC4871933
- [13]Phaloprakarn C Tangjitgamol S. Diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus using a modified 100 g oral glucose tolerance test. J Perinatol 2008; 28: 07– 11. 18165827
- [14]Gao XL Wei YM Yang HX. Difference between 2 h and 3 h 75 g glucose tolerance test in the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM): results from a national survey on prevalence of GDM. Front Med China 2010; 4: 303– 7. 21191836
- [15]Agarwal MM Dhatt GS Punnose J. Gestational diabetes: an alternative, patient-friendly approach for using the diagnostic 100-g OGTT in high-risk populations. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2006; 273: 325– 30. 16328394
- [17]Putoto G Somigliana E Olivo F. A simplified diagnostic work-up for the detection of gestational diabetes mellitus in low resources settings: achievements and challenges. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2020; 302: 1127– 34. 32734411 PMC7525284
- [18]Cunningham FG. Willams Obstetrics. 25th ed. 2018; New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, pp. 1109.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Evolution of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus across Continents in 21st Century
Dłuski, D. F., Ruszała, M., Rudziński, G., Pożarowska, K., Brzuszkiewicz, K., & Leszczyńska-Gorzelak, B. (2022) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph192315804 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
- Authors
- Cha, H.-H., Lee, W. K., Kim, S., Kim, H. M., Kim, M. J., & Seong, W. J.
- Affiliations
- Kyungpook National University Hospital (KR)
- Kyungpook National University (KR)
- Corresponding author
- Seong, Won Joon
- ORCID
- Cha, Hyun-Hwa
- Venue
- Medicine
- Published
- 2022-03-11
- Volume
- 101
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- e29025
- ISSN
- 0025-7974 (ISSN-L)
- 1536-5964
- PMC
- PMC8913078
- OpenAlex
- W4224296276
- Cited by
- 7
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 0.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Gestational Diabetes Research and Management
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
- Keywords
- gestational diabetes mellitus, diagnosis, cut-off values, 50-g oral glucose tolerance test, blood glucose threshold, pregnancy
- MeSH terms
- Blood Glucose, Blood Specimen Collection, Female, Glucose Tolerance Test, Humans, Pregnancy, Diabetes, Gestational, Phlebotomy
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
