The proposed GDM diagnostic criteria: a difference, to be a difference, must make a difference

Abstract

The new criteria for diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus proposed by the International Association of Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Group (IADPSG) transports back the controversy and the lack of agreement to the frontlines. The recommended criteria are based on results of the observational hyperglycemia and adverse pregnancy outcome study (HAPO). These criteria will increase the frequency of gestational diabetes diagnosis by 2–8 folds, depending upon ethnicity, and prevalence of obesity. Do the costs and implied resources justify using the proposed endpoints that will define pregnancy outcome and severity especially when the appropriate outcomes and odds ratio used to define the diagnosis are questionable? Furthermore, due to the large disparity around the globe in relation to the prevalence of gestational diabetes raises the question if single diagnostic criteria can be made to fit all?!? The current review analyzes the risks, costs and benefits that may influence the rate of gestational diabetes in relation to the worldwide prevalence.

Keywords::

• Cost-benefit
• ethnicity
• gestational diabetes diagnosis
• obesity
• perinatal outcome

Declaration of Interest: The authors report no conflict of interest.