Predicting primary cesarean delivery in pregnancies complicated by gestational diabetes mellitus.
gestational diabetes
mode of delivery
prediction model
primary CD
Journal
American journal of obstetrics and gynecology
ISSN: 1097-6868
Titre abrégé: Am J Obstet Gynecol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0370476
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 2023
11 2023
Historique:
received:
21
09
2022
revised:
31
05
2023
accepted:
01
06
2023
pmc-release:
07
12
2024
medline:
6
12
2023
pubmed:
9
6
2023
entrez:
8
6
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Prediction models have shown promise in helping clinicians and patients engage in shared decision-making by providing quantitative estimates of individual risk of important clinical outcomes. Gestational diabetes mellitus is a common complication of pregnancy, which places patients at higher risk of primary CD. Suspected fetal macrosomia diagnosed on prenatal ultrasound is a well-known risk factor for primary CD in patients with gestational diabetes mellitus, but tools incorporating multiple risk factors to provide more accurate CD risk are lacking. Such tools could help facilitate shared decision-making and risk reduction by identifying patients with both high and low chances of intrapartum primary CD. This study aimed to develop and internally validate a multivariable model to estimate the risk of intrapartum primary CD in pregnancies complicated by gestational diabetes mellitus undergoing a trial of labor. This study identified a cohort of patients with gestational diabetes mellitus derived from a large, National Institutes of Health-funded medical record abstraction study who delivered singleton live-born infants at ≥34 weeks of gestation at a large tertiary care center between January 2002 and March 2013. The exclusion criteria included previous CD, contraindications to vaginal delivery, scheduled primary CD, and known fetal anomalies. Candidate predictors were clinical variables routinely available to a practitioner in the third trimester of pregnancy found to be associated with an increased risk of CD in gestational diabetes mellitus. Stepwise backward elimination was used to build the logistic regression model. The Hosmer-Lemeshow test was used to demonstrate goodness of fit. Model discrimination was evaluated via the concordance index and displayed as the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Internal model validation was performed with bootstrapping of the original dataset. Random resampling with replacement was performed for 1000 replications to assess predictive ability. An additional analysis was performed in which the population was stratified by parity to evaluate the model's predictive ability among nulliparous and multiparous individuals. Of the 3570 pregnancies meeting the study criteria, 987 (28%) had a primary CD. Of note, 8 variables were included in the final model, all significantly associated with CD. They included large for gestational age, polyhydramnios, older maternal age, early pregnancy body mass index, first hemoglobin A1C recorded in pregnancy, nulliparity, insulin treatment, and preeclampsia. Model calibration and discrimination were satisfactory with the Hosmer-Lemeshow test (P=.862) and an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.75 (95% confidence interval, 0.74-0.77). Internal validation demonstrated similar discriminatory ability. Stratification by parity demonstrated that the model worked well among both nulliparous and multiparous patients. Using information routinely available in the third trimester of pregnancy, a clinically pragmatic model can predict intrapartum primary CD risk with reasonable reliability in pregnancies complicated by gestational diabetes mellitus and may provide quantitative data to guide patients in understanding their individual primary CD risk based on preexisting and acquired risk factors.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Prediction models have shown promise in helping clinicians and patients engage in shared decision-making by providing quantitative estimates of individual risk of important clinical outcomes. Gestational diabetes mellitus is a common complication of pregnancy, which places patients at higher risk of primary CD. Suspected fetal macrosomia diagnosed on prenatal ultrasound is a well-known risk factor for primary CD in patients with gestational diabetes mellitus, but tools incorporating multiple risk factors to provide more accurate CD risk are lacking. Such tools could help facilitate shared decision-making and risk reduction by identifying patients with both high and low chances of intrapartum primary CD.
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to develop and internally validate a multivariable model to estimate the risk of intrapartum primary CD in pregnancies complicated by gestational diabetes mellitus undergoing a trial of labor.
STUDY DESIGN
This study identified a cohort of patients with gestational diabetes mellitus derived from a large, National Institutes of Health-funded medical record abstraction study who delivered singleton live-born infants at ≥34 weeks of gestation at a large tertiary care center between January 2002 and March 2013. The exclusion criteria included previous CD, contraindications to vaginal delivery, scheduled primary CD, and known fetal anomalies. Candidate predictors were clinical variables routinely available to a practitioner in the third trimester of pregnancy found to be associated with an increased risk of CD in gestational diabetes mellitus. Stepwise backward elimination was used to build the logistic regression model. The Hosmer-Lemeshow test was used to demonstrate goodness of fit. Model discrimination was evaluated via the concordance index and displayed as the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Internal model validation was performed with bootstrapping of the original dataset. Random resampling with replacement was performed for 1000 replications to assess predictive ability. An additional analysis was performed in which the population was stratified by parity to evaluate the model's predictive ability among nulliparous and multiparous individuals.
RESULTS
Of the 3570 pregnancies meeting the study criteria, 987 (28%) had a primary CD. Of note, 8 variables were included in the final model, all significantly associated with CD. They included large for gestational age, polyhydramnios, older maternal age, early pregnancy body mass index, first hemoglobin A1C recorded in pregnancy, nulliparity, insulin treatment, and preeclampsia. Model calibration and discrimination were satisfactory with the Hosmer-Lemeshow test (P=.862) and an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.75 (95% confidence interval, 0.74-0.77). Internal validation demonstrated similar discriminatory ability. Stratification by parity demonstrated that the model worked well among both nulliparous and multiparous patients.
CONCLUSION
Using information routinely available in the third trimester of pregnancy, a clinically pragmatic model can predict intrapartum primary CD risk with reasonable reliability in pregnancies complicated by gestational diabetes mellitus and may provide quantitative data to guide patients in understanding their individual primary CD risk based on preexisting and acquired risk factors.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37290567
pii: S0002-9378(23)00371-X
doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2023.06.002
pmc: PMC10700654
mid: NIHMS1907404
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
549.e1-549.e16Subventions
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : K12 HD092535
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : R01 HD077592
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Références
Obstet Gynecol. 2022 Jan 1;139(1):73-82
pubmed: 34856577
BJOG. 2016 Jun;123(7):1060-4
pubmed: 26806638
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1994 Oct;171(4):952-5
pubmed: 7943108
Diabetes Care. 2018 Jul;41(7):1346-1361
pubmed: 29934478
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Sep;205(3):262.e1-8
pubmed: 22071057
Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Sep;128(3):487-494
pubmed: 27500344
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020 Oct 8;20(1):607
pubmed: 33032545
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Feb;218(2):254.e1-254.e7
pubmed: 29224730
Diabetes Care. 2013 May;36(5):1111-6
pubmed: 23275358
Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Jun;135(6):e237-e260
pubmed: 32443079
PLoS Med. 2018 Jan 23;15(1):e1002494
pubmed: 29360829
Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Nov;112(5):1015-22
pubmed: 18978100
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Nov;225(5):517.e1-517.e17
pubmed: 33887240
Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Jul;118(1):29-38
pubmed: 21646928
AMA J Ethics. 2022 Mar 1;24(3):E233-238
pubmed: 35325525
Reprod Sci. 2022 Jul;29(7):2030-2038
pubmed: 35534768
Stat Med. 1996 Feb 28;15(4):361-87
pubmed: 8668867
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Dec;225(6):664.e1-664.e7
pubmed: 34043983
Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Aug;136(2):402-410
pubmed: 32649502
Obstet Gynecol. 2017 May;129(5):e123-e133
pubmed: 28426618
JAMA. 1996 Apr 17;275(15):1165-70
pubmed: 8609683
Ultrasound. 2018 Feb;26(1):32-41
pubmed: 29456580
Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Nov;126(5):978-986
pubmed: 26444129
Am J Perinatol. 2015 Feb;32(3):239-46
pubmed: 24971568
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Jul;211(1):39.e1-8
pubmed: 24613756
Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2019 Nov;157:107841
pubmed: 31518656
J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2012 Jan;38(1):154-9
pubmed: 21995455
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2015 Mar;186:42-8
pubmed: 25616254
JAMA. 2021 Aug 17;326(7):660-669
pubmed: 34402831
JAMA. 2016 Feb 23;315(8):762-74
pubmed: 26903335
Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Feb;133(2):e97-e109
pubmed: 30681542
Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Feb;131(2):e49-e64
pubmed: 29370047
Epidemiology. 2022 Mar 1;33(2):260-268
pubmed: 34799472