Dataset Information

Metformin or insulin: logical treatment in women with gestational diabetes in the Middle East, our experience.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:The debate still continues about the preferred modality of treatment of gestational diabetes requiring pharmacological treatment. Insulin was previously considered as the gold standard, but the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence now recommend metformin as the first line drug of choice. The pharmacological management of gestational diabetes mellitus in the Middle East with its high risk population has not been widely published. We aim to evaluate the safety and efficacy of using metformin in comparison to insulin, in our group of patients, and to study key associated morbidities. RESULTS:A total of 291 women registered in the clinic during the study period. One hundred and twenty-one (121) were women with gestational diabetes Mellitus requiring medical therapy. Among them, 107 delivered at term. Ninety (84%) women received metformin. Additional insulin was required in 32% of these patients. There was a significant difference in the birth weight of babies in the metformin with insulin group of 207 g (p value 0.04) in favour of metformin. There was no significant difference in maternal or neonatal morbidities between the groups. Metformin was thus found to be a safe, practical and cost effective medication to be offered to our population.

SUBMITTER: Christian SJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6029353 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Metformin or insulin: logical treatment in women with gestational diabetes in the Middle East, our experience.

Christian Sindu J SJ Boama Vincent V Satti Hiba H Ramawat Joohi J Elhadd Tarik A TA Ashawesh Khaled K Dukhan Khaled K Beer Stephen S

BMC research notes 20180703 1

<h4>Objective</h4>The debate still continues about the preferred modality of treatment of gestational diabetes requiring pharmacological treatment. Insulin was previously considered as the gold standard, but the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence now recommend metformin as the first line drug of choice. The pharmacological management of gestational diabetes mellitus in the Middle East with its high risk population has not been widely published. We aim to evaluate the safety and eff ...[more]

PMID: 29970197

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo summarize short term outcomes in randomized controlled trials comparing glibenclamide or metformin versus insulin or versus each other in women with gestational diabetes requiring drug treatment.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesRandomized controlled trials that fulfilled all the following: (1) published as full text; (2) addressed women with gestational diabetes requiring drug treatment; (3) compared glibenclamide v insulin, metformin v insulin, or metformin v glibenclamide; and (4) provided information on maternal or fetal outcomes.Data sourcesMedline, CENTRAL, and Embase were searched up to 20 May 2014.Outcomes measuresWe considered 14 primary outcomes (6 maternal, 8 fetal) and 16 secondary (5 maternal, 11 fetal) outcomes.ResultsWe analyzed 15 articles, including 2509 subjects. Significant differences for primary outcomes in glibenclamide v insulin were obtained in birth weight (mean difference 109 g (95% confidence interval 35.9 to 181)), macrosomia (risk ratio 2.62 (1.35 to 5.08)), and neonatal hypoglycaemia (risk ratio 2.04 (1.30 to 3.20)). In metformin v insulin, significance was reached for maternal weight gain (mean difference -1.14 kg (-2.22 to -0.06)), gestational age at delivery (mean difference -0.16 weeks (-0.30 to -0.02)), and preterm birth (risk ratio 1.50 (1.04 to 2.16)), with a trend for neonatal hypoglycaemia (risk ratio 0.78 (0.60 to 1.01)). In metformin v glibenclamide, significance was reached for maternal weight gain (mean difference -2.06 kg (-3.98 to -0.14)), birth weight (mean difference -209 g (-314 to -104)), macrosomia (risk ratio 0.33 (0.13 to 0.81)), and large for gestational age newborn (risk ratio 0.44 (0.21 to 0.92)). Four secondary outcomes were better for metformin in metformin v insulin, and one was worse for metformin in metformin v glibenclamide. Treatment failure was higher with metformin than with glibenclamide.ConclusionsAt short term, in women with gestational diabetes requiring drug treatment, glibenclamide is clearly inferior to both insulin and metformin, while metformin (plus insulin when required) performs slightly better than insulin. According to these results, glibenclamide should not be used for the treatment of women with gestational diabetes if insulin or metformin is available.Systematic review registration NCT01998113.

Project description:ImportanceMetformin is an emerging option for treating gestational diabetes (GDM). However, because metformin crosses the placenta, patients and clinicians are concerned with its long-term effect on child health.ObjectiveTo estimate the association of treating GDM with metformin vs insulin with child growth and development.Design, setting, and participantsPopulation-based cohort study of New Zealand women treated with metformin or insulin for GDM from 2005 to 2012 and their children. This study linked national health care data to create a cohort of mothers and their children, including data from maternity care, pharmaceutical dispensing, hospitalizations, demographic records, and the B4 School Check (B4SC) preschool health assessment. Women treated pharmacologically with metformin or insulin during pregnancy were included. We excluded pregnancies with evidence of diabetes and deliveries prior to 2013. Liveborn infants were linked to their B4SC results. Data were analyzed between January 2017 and May 2018.ExposuresPharmacologic treatment for GDM with metformin or insulin, measured using pharmaceutical claims data.Main outcomes and measuresChild growth (weight and height) and Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) scores for behavioral development. All outcomes were derived from the B4SC screening program. Linear and log-binomial regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to estimate the association of child growth and psychosocial outcomes with metformin vs insulin treatment for GDM.ResultsIn both treatment groups, the mean (SD) maternal age was 32 (5) years. A large proportion of mothers who were treated with insulin identified as New Zealand European (867 [44.9%]) while 576 mothers who were treated with metformin (28.9%) identified as New Zealand European. Approximately one-third of mothers who were treated with metformin (n = 639) identified as Asian. We identified 3928 pregnancies treated with metformin (n = 1996) or insulin (n = 1932). After adjustment, we observed no meaningful difference in weight for height z scores between children exposed to metformin compared with insulin (mean difference, -0.10; 95% CI, -0.20 to 0.01). Risk of being 85th percentile or greater for weight for height was similar between treatment groups (adjusted risk ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.83-1.02). Mean SDQ scores were not meaningfully different between the treatment groups, Children of metformin-treated mothers were not significantly more likely to have parent-reported SDQ scores of 14 or more (adjusted risk ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.88-1.46) than those of insulin-treated mothers.Conclusions and relevanceOur study compares long-term outcomes among school-aged children following maternal use of metformin vs insulin treatment for GDM. Children of metformin-treated mothers were indistinguishable on growth and developmental assessments from those of insulin-treated mothers. These results will help inform future GDM treatment guidelines.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Metformin is increasingly offered as an acceptable and economic alternative to insulin for treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in many countries. However, the impact of maternal metformin treatment on the trajectory of fetal, infant, and childhood growth is unknown. METHODS AND FINDINGS:PubMed, Ovid Embase, Medline, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane database were systematically searched (from database inception to 26 February 2019). Outcomes of GDM-affected pregnancies randomised to treatment with metformin versus insulin were included (randomised controlled trials and prospective randomised controlled studies) from cohorts including European, American, Asian, Australian, and African women. Studies including pregnant women with pre-existing diabetes or non-diabetic women were excluded, as were trials comparing metformin treatment with oral glucose-lowering agents other than insulin. Two reviewers independently assessed articles for eligibility and risk of bias, and conflicts were resolved by a third reviewer. Outcome measures were parameters of fetal, infant, and childhood growth, including weight, height, BMI, and body composition. In total, 28 studies (n = 3,976 participants) met eligibility criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. No studies reported fetal growth parameters; 19 studies (n = 3,723 neonates) reported measures of neonatal growth. Neonates born to metformin-treated mothers had lower birth weights (mean difference -107.7 g, 95% CI -182.3 to -32.7, I2 = 83%, p = 0.005) and lower ponderal indices (mean difference -0.13 kg/m3, 95% CI -0.26 to 0.00, I2 = 0%, p = 0.04) than neonates of insulin-treated mothers. The odds of macrosomia (odds ratio [OR] 0.59, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.77, p < 0.001) and large for gestational age (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.99, p = 0.04) were lower following maternal treatment with metformin compared to insulin. There was no difference in neonatal height or incidence of small for gestational age between groups. Two studies (n = 411 infants) reported measures of infant growth (18-24 months of age). In contrast to the neonatal phase, metformin-exposed infants were significantly heavier than those in the insulin-exposed group (mean difference 440 g, 95% CI 50 to 830, I2 = 4%, p = 0.03). Three studies (n = 520 children) reported mid-childhood growth parameters (5-9 years). In mid-childhood, BMI was significantly higher (mean difference 0.78 kg/m2, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.33, I2 = 7%, p = 0.005) following metformin exposure than following insulin exposure, although the difference in absolute weights between the groups was not significantly different (p = 0.09). Limited evidence (1 study with data treated as 2 cohorts) suggested that adiposity indices (abdominal [p = 0.02] and visceral [p = 0.03] fat volumes) may be higher in children born to metformin-treated compared to insulin-treated mothers. Study limitations include heterogeneity in metformin dosing, heterogeneity in diagnostic criteria for GDM, and the scarcity of reporting of childhood outcomes. CONCLUSIONS:Following intrauterine exposure to metformin for treatment of maternal GDM, neonates are significantly smaller than neonates whose mothers were treated with insulin during pregnancy. Despite lower average birth weight, metformin-exposed children appear to experience accelerated postnatal growth, resulting in heavier infants and higher BMI by mid-childhood compared to children whose mothers were treated with insulin. Such patterns of low birth weight and postnatal catch-up growth have been reported to be associated with adverse long-term cardio-metabolic outcomes. This suggests a need for further studies examining longitudinal perinatal and childhood outcomes following intrauterine metformin exposure. This review protocol was registered with PROSPERO under registration number CRD42018117503.

Dataset Information

Metformin or insulin: logical treatment in women with gestational diabetes in the Middle East, our experience.

Publications

Metformin or insulin: logical treatment in women with gestational diabetes in the Middle East, our experience.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure