Association of increased fetal epicardial fat thickness with maternal pregestational and gestational diabetes

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate the changes of fetal epicardial fat thickness (EFT) in pregnancies with pregestational diabetes mellitus (PGDM) and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and to identify the diagnostic effectiveness of fetal EFT in differentiating PGDM and GDM from normal pregnancies.

Methods

The study was conducted with pregnant women who admitted to perinatology department between October 2020 and August 2021. Patients were grouped as PGDM (n = 110), GDM (n = 110), and control (n = 110) for comparison of fetal EFT. EFT was measured in all three groups at 29 weeks of gestation. Demographic characteristics and ultrasonographic findings were recorded and compared.

Results

The mean fetal EFT was significantly higher in PGDM (1.47 ± 0.083 mm, p < .001) and GDM (1.40 ± 0.082 mm, p < .001) groups compared to control group (1.19 ± 0.049 mm) and was also significantly higher in PGDM group than GDM group (p < .001). Fetal EFT was significantly positively correlated with maternal age, fasting, 1st hour, 2nd hour glucose values, HbA1c, fetal abdominal circumference, and deepest vertical pocket of amniotic fluid (p < .001). Fetal EFT value of 1.3 mm diagnosed PGDM patients with a sensitivity of 97.3% and a specificity of 98.2%. Fetal EFT value of 1.27 mm diagnosed GDM patients with a sensitivity of 94% and a specificity of 95%.

Conclusions

Fetal EFT is greater in pregnancies with diabetes than in normal pregnancies, and also greater in PGDM than in GDM. In addition, fetal EFT is strongly correlated with maternal blood glucose levels in diabetic pregnancies.

Keywords:

• Epicardial fat thickness
• gestational diabetes
• pregestational diabetes
• screening of diabetes

Ethical approval

The research related to human use complied with all the relevant national regulations, institutional policies, and in accordance with the tenets of the Helsinki Declaration, and has been approved by the authors’ Institutional Review Board or equivalent committee (Izmir Tepecik Training and Research Hospital Ethics Committee, decision no: 2021/02-50).

Author contributions

All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.

Consent form

Informed consent was obtained from all individuals included in this study.

Disclosure statement

The authors report no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Funding

None declared.