Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
BioMed Research International
Volume 2017 (2017), Article ID 2746471, 12 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/2746471
Review Article

Scientific Evidence for Different Options for GDM Screening and Management: Controversies and Review of the Literature

1Department of Experimental Clinical and Medical Science, DISM, Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Udine, Udine, Italy
2Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA

Correspondence should be addressed to Vincenzo Berghella; ude.nosreffej@allehgreb.oznecniv

Received 3 February 2017; Revised 28 February 2017; Accepted 8 March 2017; Published 10 April 2017

Academic Editor: Erich Cosmi

Copyright © 2017 Claudia Caissutti and Vincenzo Berghella. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Background. Gestational diabetes (GDM) affects up to 7% of pregnant women and is associated with several maternal and perinatal morbidities. International organizations suggest several different recommendations regarding how to screen and to manage GDM. Objective. We aimed to analyze the most important and employed guidelines about screening and management of GDM and we investigated existing related literature. Results. We found several different criteria for screening for GDM, for monitoring GDM, and for starting pharmacological therapy. When using IADPSG criteria, GDM rate increased, perinatal outcomes improved, and screening became cost-effective. Compared to no treatment, treatment of women meeting criteria for GDM by IADPSG criteria but not by other less strict criteria has limited evidence for an effect on adverse pregnancy outcomes.