Lifestyle intervention to prevent type 2 diabetes after a pregnancy complicated by gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis update

被引:0
作者
Bracco, Paula Andreghetto [1 ,3 ]
Reichelt, Angela Jacob [2 ]
Alves, Luisia Feichas [4 ]
Vidor, Pedro Rodrigues [5 ]
Oppermann, Maria Lucia Rocha [6 ,7 ]
Duncan, Bruce Bartholow [3 ,7 ]
Schmidt, Maria Ines [3 ,7 ]
机构
[1] Univ Fed Rio Grande Do Sul, Stat Dept, Porto Alegre, Brazil
[2] Hosp Clin Porto Alegre, Endocrinol & Metab Serv, Porto Alegre, Brazil
[3] Univ Fed Rio Grande do Sul, Postgrad Program Epidemiol, Porto Alegre, Brazil
[4] Univ Fed Rio Grande do Sul, Cent Lib, Porto Alegre, Brazil
[5] Univ Fed Rio Grande do Sul, Sch Med, Porto Alegre, Brazil
[6] Univ Fed Rio Grande do Sul, Sch Med, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Porto Alegre, Brazil
[7] Hosp Clin Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Brazil
关键词
Diabetes mellitus; Gestational diabetes; Lifestyle; Meta-analysis; WOMEN; WEIGHT; IMPACT; BIAS;
D O I
10.1186/s13098-025-01606-x
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
BackgroundWomen with prior gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are at increased risk of type 2 diabetes, and lifestyle intervention (LSI) offered a decade after pregnancy is effective in preventing diabetes. However, since diabetes frequently onsets in the initial years following pregnancy, preventive actions should be implemented closer to pregnancy. We aimed to assess the effect of lifestyle interventions, compared to standard care, in reducing the incidence of diabetes following a pregnancy complicated by GDM.MethodsWe searched the Cochrane Library, Embase, MEDLINE, and Web of Science from inception to July 21, 2024, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing LSI to prevent diabetes following gestational diabetes. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We evaluated the risk of bias with the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias tool RoB-2 and the certainty of the evidence with GRADE methodology. We used the DerSimonian-Laird random effects pooling method and evaluated heterogeneity with the I2 statistic and the Chi2 test.ResultsWe identified 24 studies involving 9017 women. In studies without high risk of bias (18 studies; 8,357 women), LSI reduced the incidence of diabetes by 19% (RR = 0.81; 95%CI 0.71.0.93). The effect was significant and more protective (RR = 0.78; 0.65, 0.94) in studies evaluating women with GDM identified specifically as at a higher risk of diabetes, compared to those intervening on women with GDM irrespective of risk (RR = 0.85; 0.70, 1.04). Similarly, when expressed in absolute terms, the overall number needed to treat (NNT) was 56 considering all studies, 71 for women with GDM irrespective of risk, and 31 for women with GDM at high risk. The intervention produced a lower weight gain (mean difference=-0.88 kg;-1.52, -0.23 for all studies; -0.62 kg;-1.22, -0.02 for studies without high risk of bias). The effects were robust in sensitivity analyses and supported by evidence of moderate certainty for diabetes and weight change.ConclusionsLSI offered to women with GDM following pregnancy is effective in preventing type 2 diabetes, despite the small postpartum weight change. The impact of LSI on incidence reduction was greater for women with GDM at a higher diabetes risk.PROSPERORegistration number CRD42024555086, Jun 28, 2024.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 60 条
  • [1] Insulin Dynamics and Pathophysiology in Youth-Onset Type 2 Diabetes
    Abu-Nejem, Rozan
    Hannon, Tamara S.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM, 2024, 109 (10) : 2411 - 2421
  • [2] Diagnostic criteria and classification of hyperglycaemia first detected in pregnancy: A World Health Organization Guideline
    Agarwal, Mukesh M.
    Boulvain, Michel
    Coetzee, Edward
    Colagiuri, Stephen
    Falavigna, Maicon
    Hod, Moshe
    Meltzer, Sara
    Metzger, Boyd
    Omori, Yasue
    Rasa, Ingvars
    Schmidt, Maria Ines
    Seshiah, Veerasamy
    Simmons, David
    Sobngwi, Eugene
    Torloni, Maria Regina
    Yang, Huixia
    Balaji, V.
    Mendis, Shanthi P. B.
    Roglic, Gojka
    Merialdi, Mario
    Betran, Ana Pilar
    Jenum, Anne Karen
    Lao, Terence
    Lopez Stewart, Gloria
    Mikhailov, Anton
    Moses, Robert
    Samad, Noorjahan
    [J]. DIABETES RESEARCH AND CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2014, 103 (03) : 341 - 363
  • [3] Alarming rise in young-onset type 2 diabetes
    不详
    [J]. LANCET DIABETES & ENDOCRINOLOGY, 2024, 12 (07) : 433 - 433
  • [4] [Anonymous], 2013, IDF Diabetes Atlas, V5th
  • [5] A pilot structured behavioural intervention trial to increase physical activity among women with recent gestational diabetes
    Cheung, N. W.
    Smith, B. J.
    van der Ploeg, H. P.
    Cinnadaio, N.
    Bauman, A.
    [J]. DIABETES RESEARCH AND CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2011, 92 (01) : E27 - E29
  • [6] A Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial of a Text Messaging Intervention with Customisation Using Linked Data from Wireless Wearable Activity Monitors to Improve Risk Factors Following Gestational Diabetes
    Cheung, N. Wah
    Blumenthal, Caron
    Smith, Ben J.
    Hogan, Roslyn
    Thiagalingam, Aravinda
    Redfern, Julie
    Barry, Tony
    Cinnadaio, Nancy
    Chow, Clara K.
    [J]. NUTRIENTS, 2019, 11 (03)
  • [7] Corporation for Digital Scholarship, 2024, Zotero Internet
  • [8] The effectiveness of pharmacological and lifestyle interventions to reduce the risk of diabetes and hyperglycaemia following gestational diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Dennison, Rebecca A.
    Oliver-Williams, Clare
    Qi, Helen Lin Jia
    Kotecha, Deeya
    Seed, Lydia
    Ward, Rebecca J.
    Griffin, Simon J.
    [J]. DIABETIC MEDICINE, 2024, 41 (06)
  • [9] METAANALYSIS IN CLINICAL-TRIALS
    DERSIMONIAN, R
    LAIRD, N
    [J]. CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 1986, 7 (03): : 177 - 188
  • [10] Trim and fill: A simple funnel-plot-based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis
    Duval, S
    Tweedie, R
    [J]. BIOMETRICS, 2000, 56 (02) : 455 - 463