Incidence of Type 1 Diabetes Is Not Increasing in a Population-Based Cohort in Olmsted County, Minnesota, USA.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the recent incidence of T1D in a US Midwestern county to determine whether this increase has been sustained and compare it with the incidence of celiac disease (CD) and also investigate the prevalence of CD, an associated autoimmune disease, within the cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A broad search strategy was used to identify all incident cases of T1D in Olmsted County, Minnesota, between January 1, 1994, and December 31, 2010, using the Rochester Epidemiology Project. Diagnosis and residency status were confirmed through the medical record. Incidence rates were directly standardized to the 2010 US population. Poisson regression was used to test for a change in incidence rate. Clinical charts were reviewed to confirm case status. RESULTS: There were 233 incident cases of T1D. Directly adjusting for age and sex with respect to the 2010 US white population, the overall annual incidence of T1D was 9.2 (95% CI, 8.0-10.4) per 100,000 people per year among all ages and 19.9 (95% CI, 16.6-23.2) per 100,000 people per year for those younger than 20 years. There was no significant increase in the incidence of T1D over time (P=.45). Despite the overall stability in annual incidence, there was an initial increasing trend followed by a plateau. Of the 109 patients with T1D (47%) tested for CD, 12% (13) had biopsy-proven CD. CONCLUSION: The incidence of T1D has stopped increasing in Olmsted County, Minnesota, in the most recent decade. Further studies are needed to confirm this finding and explore reasons for this plateau.

Ten Years of Optimizing Outcomes for Women With Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes in Pregnancy-The Atlantic DIP Experience.

CONTEXT: Pregnancy for women with type 1 or type 2 diabetes is a time of increased risk for both mother and baby. The Atlantic Diabetes in Pregnancy program provides coordinated, evidence-based care for women with diabetes in Ireland. Founded in 2005, the program now shares outcomes over its first decade in caring for pregnant women with diabetes. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to assess improvements in clinical outcomes after the introduction of interventions. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: We retrospectively examined 445 pregnancies in women with type 1 and type 2 diabetes and compared them over two timepoints, 2005­2009 and 2010­2014. INTEVENTIONS: Interventions introduced over that time include: provision of combined antenatal/diabetes clinics, prepregnancy care, electronic data management, local clinical care guidelines, professional and patient education materials, an app, and a web site. MAIN OUTCOMES: Pregnancy outcomes were measured. RESULTS: The introduction of the Atlantic Diabetes in Pregnancy program has been associated with a reduction in adverse neonatal outcomes. There has been a reduction in congenital malformations (5 to 1.8%; P = .04), stillbirths (2.3 vs 0.4%; P = .09), despite an upward trend in maternal age (mean age, 31.7 vs 33 years), obesity (29 vs 43%; body mass index >30 kg/m2), and excessive gestational weight gain (24 vs 38%; P = .002). These improvements in outcomes occur alongside an increase in attendance at prepregnancy care (23 to 49%; P < .001), use of folic acid (45 vs 71%; P < .001), and sustained improvement in glycemic control. CONCLUSIONS: Changing the process of clinical care delivery and utilizing evidence-based interventions in a pragmatic clinical setting improves pregnancy outcomes for women with pregestational diabetes. We now need to target optimization of maternal body mass index before pregnancy and put a greater focus on gestational weight gain through education and monitoring.

Comparing type 1 and type 2 diabetes in pregnancy- similar conditions or is a separate approach required?

BACKGROUND: Pregnancy in women with type 1 (T1DM) or type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is associated with increased risk. These conditions are managed similarly during pregnancy, and compared directly in analyses, however they affect women of different age, body mass index and ethnicity. METHODS: We assess if differences exist in pregnancy outcomes between T1DM and T2DM by comparing them directly and with matched controls. We also analyze the effect of glycemic control on pregnancy outcomes and analyze predictive variables for poor outcome. RESULTS: We include 323 women with diabetes and 660 glucose-tolerant controls. T2DM women had higher BMI, age and parity with a shorter duration of diabetes and better glycemic control. Preeclampsia occurred more in women with T1DM only. Rates of elective cesarean section were similar between groups but greater than in controls, emergency cesarean section was increased in women with type 1 diabetes. Maternal morbidity in T1DM was double that of matched controls but T2DM was similar to controls. Babies of mothers with diabetes were more likely to be delivered prematurely. Neonatal hypoglycemia occurred more in T1DM than T2DM and contributed to a higher rate of admission to neonatal intensive care for both groups. Adverse neonatal outcomes including stillbirths and congenital abnormalities were seen in both groups but were more common in T1DM pregnancies. HbA1C values at which these poor outcomes occurred differed between T1 and T2DM. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnancy outcomes in T1DM and T2DM are different and occur at different levels of glycemia. This should be considered when planning and managing pregnancy and when counseling women.

Applying current screening tools for gestational diabetes mellitus to a European population: is it time for change?

OBJECTIVE: The optimal screening regimen for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) remains controversial. Risk factors used in selective screening guidelines vary. Given that universal screening is not currently adopted in our European population, we aimed to evaluate which selective screening strategies were most applicable. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Between 2007 and 2009, 5,500 women were universally screened for GDM, and a GDM prevalence of 12.4% using International Association of Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria was established. We retrospectively applied selective screening guidelines to this cohort. RESULTS: When we applied National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), Irish, and American Diabetes Association (ADA) guidelines, 54% (2,576), 58% (2,801), and 76% (3,656) of women, respectively, had at least one risk factor for GDM and would have undergone testing. However, when NICE, Irish, and ADA guidelines were applied, 20% (120), 16% (101), and 5% (31) of women, respectively, had no risk factor and would have gone undiagnosed. Using a BMI≥30 kg/m2 for screening has a specificity of 81% with moderate sensitivity at 48%. Reducing the BMI to ≥25 kg/m2 (ADA) increases the sensitivity to 80% with a specificity of 44%. Women with no risk factors diagnosed with GDM on universal screening had more adverse pregnancy outcomes than those with normal glucose tolerance. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis provides a strong argument for universal screening. However, if selective screening were adopted, the ADA guidelines would result in the highest rate of diagnosis and the lowest number of missed cases.

ATLANTIC DIP: closing the loop: a change in clinical practice can improve outcomes for women with pregestational diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Prospective evaluation of pregnancy outcomes in women with pregestational diabetes over 6 years. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The ATLANTIC Diabetes in Pregnancy group provides care for women with diabetes throughout pregnancy. In 2007, the group identified that women were poorly prepared for pregnancy and outcomes were suboptimal. A change in practice occurred, offering women specialist-led, hub-and-spoke evidence-based care. We now compare outcomes from 2005 to 2007 with those from 2008 to 2010. RESULTS: There was an increase in the numbers attending preconception care (28-52%, P = 0.01). Glycemic control before and throughout pregnancy improved. There was an overall increase in live births (74-92%, P < 0.001) and decrease in perinatal mortality rate (6.2-0.65%, P < 0.001). There was a decrease in large-for-gestational-age babies in mothers with type 1 diabetes mellitus (30-26%, P = 0.02). Elective caesarean section rates increased, while emergency section rates decreased. CONCLUSIONS: Changing the process of clinical care delivery can improve outcomes in women with pregestational diabetes.

ATLANTIC DIP: the impact of obesity on pregnancy outcome in glucose-tolerant women.

OBJECTIVE A prospective study of the impact of obesity on pregnancy outcome in glucose-tolerant women. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS The Irish Atlantic Diabetes in Pregnancy network advocates universal screening for gestational diabetes. Women with normoglycemia and a recorded booking BMI were included. Maternal and infant outcomes correlated with booking BMI are reported. RESULTS A total of 2,329 women fulfilled the criteria. Caesarean deliveries increased in overweight (OW) (odds ratio 1.57 [95% CI 1.24-1.98]) and obese (OB) (2.65 [2.03-3.46]) women. Hypertensive disorders increased in OW (2.30 [1.55-3.40]) and OB (3.29 [2.14-5.05]) women. Reported miscarriages increased in OB (1.4 [1.11-1.77]) women. Mean birth weight was 3.46 kg in normal BMI (NBMI), 3.54 kg in OW, and 3.62 kg in OB (P < 0.01) mothers. Macrosomia occurred in 15.5, 21.4, and 27.8% of babies of NBMI, OW, and OB mothers, respectively (P < 0.01). Shoulder dystocia occur in 4% (>4 kg) compared with 0.2% (<4 kg) babies (P < 0.01). Congenital malformation risk increased for OB (2.47 [1.09-5.60]) women. CONCLUSIONS OW and OB glucose-tolerant women have greater adverse pregnancy outcomes.