Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: The sonographic assessment of estimated fetal weight (EFW) is essential for identification of fetuses in weight extremes and aids in peripartum management. However, there are inconsistent reports regarding EFW accuracy.

Objective: To examine maternal and fetal determinants associated with unreliable EFW.

Methods: A retrospective case-control study was conducted at a single, tertiary medical center between 2011 and 2019. All term, singleton deliveries with a sonographic EFW within 2 weeks of delivery were included. Unreliable EFW was defined as > 500 grams discordance between it and the actual birth weight. We allocated the study cohort into two groups: unreliable EFW (cases) and accurate EFW (controls).

Results: Overall, 41,261 deliveries met inclusion criteria. Of these, 1721 (4.17%) had unreliable EFW. The factors positively associated with unreliable EFW included body mass index > 30 kg/m², weight gain > 20 kg, higher amniotic fluid index, pregestational diabetes, gestational age > 41^0/7, and birth weight ≥ 4000 grams. On multiple regression analysis, pregestational diabetes (odds ratio [OR] 2.22, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 1.56–3.17, P < 0.001) and a higher birth weight (OR 1.91, 95%CI 1.79–2.04, P < 0.001) were independently associated with unreliable EFW. On analysis of different weight categories, pregestational diabetes was associated with unreliable EFW only among birth weights ≥ 3500 grams (OR 3.28, 95%CI 1.98–5.44, P< 0.001) and ≥ 4000 grams (OR 4.27, 95%CI 2.31–7.90, P < 0.001).

Conclusion: Pregestational diabetes and increased birth weight are independent risk factors for unreliable EFW and should be considered when planning delivery management.

Background: Pregestational diabetes mellitus (PGDM) carries a significantly elevated risk of adverse maternal and fetal outcomes. There is evidence that certain interventions reduce the risk for adverse outcomes. Studies have shown that a multi-disciplinary approach improves pregnancy outcomes in women with PGDM.

Objectives: To determine pregnancy outcomes in women with PGDM using a multi-disciplinary approach.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed consecutive women with pregestational type 1 and type 2 diabetes who were monitored at a high-risk pregnancy clinic at the Sheba Medical Center. Clinical data were obtained from the medical records. All data related to maternal glucose control and insulin pump function were prospectively recorded on Medtronic CareLink® pro software (Medtronic MiniMed, Northridge, CA).

Results: This study comprised 121 neonates from 116 pregnancies of 94 women. In 83% of the pregnancies continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) sensors were applied during a part or all of the pregnancy. Pregnancy outcomes among women who were followed by a multi-disciplinary team before and during pregnancy, and during labor and puerperium resulted in better glucose control (hemoglobin A1c 6.4% vs. 7.8%), lower risk for pregnancy induced hypertension/preeclampsia (7.7% vs. 15.6%), lower birth weight (3212 g vs. 3684 g), and lower rate of large size for gestational age and macrosomia (23.1% vs. 54.2% and 3.3% vs. 28.4%, respectively), compared to data from European cohorts.

Conclusions: The multi-disciplinary approach for treating women with PGDM practiced in the high-risk pregnancy clinic at the Sheba Medical Center resulted in lower rates of macrosomia, LGA, and pregnancy induced hypertension compared to rates reported in the literature.