Advertisement

Endocrine

, Volume 66, Issue 2, pp 210–219 | Cite as

Inverse association between 1,5-anhydroglucitol and neonatal diabetic complications

  • Enav YefetEmail author
  • Shams Twafra
  • Neta Shwartz
  • Noura Hissin
  • Jamal Hasanein
  • Raul Colodner
  • Neetsa Mirsky
  • Zohar Nachum
Original Article
  • 49 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

A glycemic control marker to predict neonatal diabetic complications is unavailable. We aimed to examine if 1,5-anhydroglucitol (1,5-AG) can predict neonatal complications in women with diabetes in pregnancy.

Methods

Prospective observational study from December 2011 to August 2013. We recruited 105 women, 70 diabetic (gestational and pregestational) and 35 nondiabetic. 1,5-AG at birth was compared between the two groups.

In the diabetic group 1,5-AG, HbA1c, and fructosamine were measured before glycemic control initiation (first visit), after 4–6 weeks (second visit), and at delivery. Women were divided to poor (1,5-AG values below median at birth) and good (1,5-AG values at median and above) glycemic control groups. Mean daily glucose charts were collected. The primary outcome was a composite of neonatal diabetic complications: respiratory distress, hypoglycemia, polycythemia, hyperbilirubinemia, and large for gestational age.

Results

Mean 1,5-AG in the nondiabetic group was similar to that of the diabetic group without the composite outcome and was significantly higher than in the diabetic group with the composite outcome.

The rate of the composite outcome was higher in the poor glycemic control group compared with the good glycemic control group (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 3.8 95% CI [1.2–12.3]). Only 1,5-AG was inversely associated with the composite outcome at all time points; the second visit was the only independent risk factor in multivariable logistic regression (OR 0.7 95% CI 0.54–0.91). The rest of the glycemic markers were not associated with neonatal composite outcome.

Conclusions

1,5-AG is inversely associated with neonatal diabetic complications and is superior to other glycemic markers in predicting those complications.

Keywords

1,5-anhydroglucitol Neonatal complications Hemoglobin A1c Glycemic control Gestational diabetes mellitus Pregnancy 

Notes

Funding

This work was supported by the Legacy Heritage Fund.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed consent

All participants in the study gave signed an informed consent form.

Supplementary material

12020_2019_2058_MOESM1_ESM.docx (27 kb)
Supplementary material

References

  1. 1.
    M.M. Hedderson, A. Ferrara, D.A. Sacks, Gestational diabetes mellitus and lesser degrees of pregnancy hyperglycemia: association with increased risk of spontaneous preterm birth. Obstet. Gynecol. 102(4), 850–856 (2003)PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    O. Langer, D.A. Rodriguez, E.M. Xenakis et al. Intensified versus conventional management of gestational diabetes. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 170(4), 1036–1046 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    C.H. Raine III, Self-monitored blood glucose: a common pitfall. Endocr. Pract. 9(2), 137–139 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    E. Cosson, B. Baz, F. Gary et al. Poor reliability and poor adherence to self-monitoring of blood glucose are common in women with gestational diabetes mellitus and may be associated with poor pregnancy outcomes. Diabetes Care 40(9), 1181–1186 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    K.M. Dungan, 1,5-anhydroglucitol (GlycoMark) as a marker of short-term glycemic control and glycemic excursions. Expert Rev. Mol. Diagn. 8(1), 9–19 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    K. Hashimoto, M. Koga, Indicators of glycemic control in patients with gestational diabetes mellitus and pregnant women with diabetes mellitus. World J. Diabetes 6(8), 1045–1056 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    A.G. Cahill, M.G. Tuuli, R. Colvin, W.T. Cade, G.A. Macones, Markers of glycemic control and neonatal morbidity in high-risk insulin-resistant pregnancies. Am. J. Perinatol. 33(2), 151–156 (2016)PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    J.B. Buse, J.L. Freeman, S.V. Edelman, L. Jovanovic, J.B. McGill, Serum 1,5-anhydroglucitol (GlycoMark): a short-term glycemic marker. Diabetes Technol. Ther. 5(3), 355–363 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    T. Yamanouchi, Y. Tachibana, H. Akanuma et al. Origin and disposal of 1,5-anhydroglucitol, a major polyol in the human body. Am. J. Physiol. 263(2 Pt 1), E268–E273 (1992)PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    T. Yamanouchi, I. Akaoka, Y. Akanuma, H. Akanuma, E. Miyashita, Mechanism for acute reduction of 1,5-anhydroglucitol in rats treated with diabetogenic agents. Am. J. Physiol. 258(3 Pt 1), E423–E427 (1990)PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    S. Yoshioka, S. Saitoh, C. Negishi et al. Variations of 1-deoxyglucose(1,5-anhydroglucitol) content in plasma from patients with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Clin. Chem. 29(7), 1396–1398 (1983)PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    H. Akanuma, K. Ogawa, Y. Lee, Y. Akanuma, Reduced levels of plasma 1,5-anhydroglucitol in diabetic patients. J. Biochem. 90(1), 157–162 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    M. Tetsuo, T. Hamada, K. Yoshimatsu, J. Ishimatsu, T. Matsunaga, Serum levels of 1,5-anhydro-D-glucitol during the normal and diabetic pregnancy and puerperium. Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 69(6), 479–485 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    T. Yamanouchi, Y. Akanuma, Serum 1,5-anhydroglucitol (1,5 AG): new clinical marker for glycemic control. Diabetes Res Clin. Pract. 24, S261–S268 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    S.S. Delaney, R.Y. Coley, Z. Brown, 1,5-Anhydroglucitol: a new predictor of neonatal birth weight in diabetic pregnancies. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 189, 55–58 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    L.A. Wright, I.B. Hirsch, T.A. Gooley, Z. Brown, 1,5-Anhydroglucitol and neonatal complications in pregnancy complicated by diabetes. Endocr. Pract. 21(7), 725–733 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    A.B. Caughey, M. Turrentine, ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 190 summary: gestational diabetes mellitus. Obstet. Gynecol. 131(2), 406–408 (2018)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    American Diabetes Association. 2. Classification and diagnosis of diabetes: standards of medical care in diabetes-2019. Diabetes Care 42(Suppl 1), S13–S28 (2019)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    M.W. Carpenter, D.R. Coustan, Criteria for screening tests for gestational diabetes. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 144(7), 768–773 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    National Diabetes Data Group. Classification and diagnosis of diabetes mellitus and other categories of glucose intolerance. Diabetes 28(12), 1039–1057 (1979)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    O. Langer, L. Brustman, A. Anyaegbunam, R. Mazze, The significance of one abnormal glucose tolerance test value on adverse outcome in pregnancy. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 157(3), 758–763 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    O. Langer, A. Anyaegbunam, L. Brustman, M. Divon, Management of women with one abnormal oral glucose tolerance test value reduces adverse outcome in pregnancy. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 161(3), 593–599 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    J.T. Roeckner, L. Sanchez-Ramos, R. Jijon-Knupp, A.M. Kaunitz, Single abnormal value on 3-hour oral glucose tolerance test during pregnancy is associated with adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 215(3), 287–297 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    A. Ben Haroush, Y. Yogev, R. Chen et al. The postprandial glucose profile in the diabetic pregnancy. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 191(2), 576–581 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    S. Dollberg, Z. Haklai, F.B. Mimouni, I. Gorfein, E.S. Gordon, Birth weight standards in the live-born population in Israel. Isr. Med Assoc. J. 7(5), 311–314 (2005)PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    C. Stettler, M. Stahl, S. Allemann et al. Association of 1,5-anhydroglucitol and 2-h postprandial blood glucose in type 2 diabetic patients. Diabetes Care 31(8), 1534–1535 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    K.M. Dungan, J.B. Buse, J. Largay et al. 1,5-anhydroglucitol and postprandial hyperglycemia as measured by continuous glucose monitoring system in moderately controlled patients with diabetes. Diabetes Care 29(6), 1214–1219 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    N. Nowak, J. Skupien, K. Cyganek, B. Matejko, M.T. Malecki, 1,5-Anhydroglucitol as a marker of maternal glycaemic control and predictor of neonatal birthweight in pregnancies complicated by type 1 diabetes mellitus. Diabetologia 56(4), 709–713 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    M. de Veciana, C.A. Major, M.A. Morgan et al. Postprandial versus preprandial blood glucose monitoring in women with gestational diabetes mellitus requiring insulin therapy. N. Engl. J. Med 333(19), 1237–1241 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics & GynecologyEmek Medical CenterAfulaIsrael
  2. 2.Department of Human Biology, Faculty of Natural SciencesUniversity of Haifa, Mount CarmelHaifaIsrael
  3. 3.Clinical Chemistry LaboratoryEmek Medical CenterAfulaIsrael
  4. 4.Neonatology DepartmentEmek Medical CenterAfulaIsrael
  5. 5.Rappaport Faculty of MedicineTechnionHaifaIsrael
  6. 6.Molecular Microbiology LaboratoryEmek Medical CenterAfulaIsrael

Personalised recommendations