A retrospective study comparing the results of continuous glucose monitoring to self-blood glucose monitoring for pregnant women with type 1 diabetes mellitus

Figures & data

Table 1. Comparison of baseline characteristics in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes mellitus using CGM versus those not using CGM.

Characteristic	Total patients (N = 265)	CBG (N = 173)	CGM (N = 92)	p- value
Age, Mean (SD) (Years)	29.4 ± 4.7	29.3 ± 0.4	29.6 ± 0.5	0.6
Weight 1^st visit, Mean (SD), (Kg)	69.6 ± 13.8	70.3 ± 1	68.3 ± 1.5	0.2
BMI at 1^st visit, Mean (SD) (Kg/m^2)	27.2 ± 5.2	27.6 ± 0.4	26.6 ± 0.6	0.1
HbA1c at 1^st visit, Mean (SD) (%)	63 ± 1	63 ± 1	62 ± 1.5	0.4
DM duration, Mean (SD) (Years)	14.1 ± 7.2	13.8 ± 0.5	14.6 ± 0.8	0.3
Ethnicity- N (%)
Qatari	133 (50.2)	71 (41)	62 (67.4)
Arab	115 (43.4)	87 (50.3)	28 (30.4)	<0.001
Others	17 (6.4)	15 (8.7)	2 (2.2)
1^st HbA1c (53 mmol/mol)	76 (28.7)	51 (29.5)	25 (27.2)	0.7
Ethnic-specific BMI categories- N (%)
Normal	97 (37.45)	53 (31.5)	44 (48.3)	0.009
Overweight	85 (32.8)	65 (38.7)	20 (22)
Obese	77 (29.7)	50 (29.8)	27 (29.7)
Comorbid conditions- N (%)
HTN	18 (7.7)	12 (7.9)	6 (7.5)	0.9
Dyslipidaemia	8 (3.1)	3 (1.8)	5 (5.5)	0.1
Hypothyroidism	71 (26.8)	44 (25.4)	27 (29.35)	0.5

BMI: Body Mass Index; HbA1c: Glycated hemoglobin A1c; DM: Diabetes mellitus; HTN: Hypertension.

Table 2. Comparison of maternal outcomes in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes mellitus using CGM versus those not using CGM.

Characteristic	Total patients (N = 265)	CBG (N = 173)	CGM (N = 92)	p-value
Last trimester HbA1c, Mean (SD), (%)	51 ± 1	51 ± 1	51 ± 1	0.8
Weekly GWG, Mean (SD), (Kgs)	0.29 ± 0.19	0.3 ± 0.01	0.3 ± 0.02	0.3
Total GWG, Mean (SD), (Kgs)	10.6 ± 6.8	10.3 ± 0.5	11.2 ± 0.7	0.3
Insulin dose/kg, Mean (SD), (Units)	0.97 ± 0.4	1.02 ± 0.37	0.87 ± 0.04	0.01
HbA1c ≤48 mmol/mol in 3^rd trimester, N (%)	106 (40)	68 (39.3)	38 (41.3)	0.7
Pregnancy-induced HTN, N (%)	24 (9.1)	14 (8.1)	10 (11.1)	0.4
Preeclampsia/Eclampsia, N (%)	16 (6.1)	10 (5.8)	6 (6.7)	0.8
Excessive GWG, N (%)	165 (63.7)	109 (64.9)	56 (61.5)	0.6
Preterm labor, N (%)	158 (59.6)	109 (63)	49 (53.3)	0.1
Mode of delivery, N (%)
Normal delivery	86 (32.45)	64 (37)	22 (24)	0.03
Cesarean Section	179 (67.55)	109 (63)	70 (76.1)
Primary C-section, N (%)	73 (40.6)	41 (37.6)	32 (45.1)	0.3

GWG: Gestational weight gain; HbA1c: Glycated hemoglobin A1c; CGM: Continuous glucose monitoring; HTN: Hypertension.

Table 3. Comparison of fetal outcomes in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes mellitus using CGM versus those not using CGM.

Characteristic	Total patients (N = 265)	No CGM (N = 173)	CGM (N = 92)	p-value
Neonatal weight, Mean (SD), Grams	3229 ± 629	3215.5 ± 608	3253.6 ± 668	0.6
Neonatal Weight, N (%)
AGA	165 (62.5)	110 (63.95)	55 (59.8)	0.6
LGA	88 (33.3)	54 (31.4)	34 (37)
SGA	11 (4.2)	8 (4.65)	3 (3.2)
Birth injury, N (%)	1 (0.4)	1 (0.6)	0	0.5
Stillbirth, N (%)	1 (0.4)	1 (0.6)	0	0.5
Neonatal ICU admission, N (%)	83 (31.3)	60 (34.7)	23 (25)	0.1
Macrosomia, N (%)	19 (7.3)	7 (4.2)	12 (13)	0.009

AGA: Appropriate for gestational age; LGA: Large for gestational age; SGA: Small for gestational age; ICU: Intensive care unit.

Figure 1. Trimester specific time-above-range (TAR), time-in-range (TIR) and time-below-range (TBR) in T1D women using CGM during pregnancy.

Data availability statement

Data sharing requires permission from the Ministry of Public Health, Qatar. Any request for datasets requestions can be made to the Medical Research Center (MRC) Qatar at Hamad Medical Corporation, which will seek legal permission form the MOPH before data sharing. [email protected]. The corresponding author Adeel Ahmad Khan can be contacted at akhan40@http://[email protected] to initiate data availability request.