• No se han encontrado resultados

CAPÍTULO 3. IMPLEMENTACIÓN DEL SISTEMA PARA EL CONTROL DE LA

3.3 U TILIZACIÓN DE CPTT ACCDR

3.3.2 Catálogos

percentile)

Glibenclamide versus insulin

One RCT reported an RR of 0.22 (95% CI 0.01 to 4.45) for SGA (Figure 26).

None of three cohort studies found a significant difference between the treatment groups [RR 0.78 (95% CI 0.42 to 1.45), no significant

heterogeneity]. Between 0% and 13% of neonates were SGA.

Acarbose versus insulin

No significant difference in rates of SGA neonates was seen in the trial by Bertini (2005)67 when

comparing acarbose with insulin (0% with acarbose and 7% with insulin) – see Figure 27.

Metformin versus insulin

One RCT and two cohort studies examined the effect of metformin versus insulin on rates of SGA neonates (Figure 28). None of the studies found a significant difference between the treatment groups. The RR was 0.74 (95% CI 0.45 to 1.19) for the RCT and 1.39 (95% CI 0.56 to 3.50) for the

TABLE 14 Acceptability of treatment

Study Treatment discontinued because of adverse effects Preference

Glibenclamide

Chmait

200479 Women preferred glibenclamide (none chose insulin) – no information on post-treatment satisfaction

Holt

200852 One woman changed from glibenclamide to insulin because of hypoglycaemia and two for other side

effects (not specified)

In Nasruddin (2009)92 three changed because of

unpredictable hypoglycaemia and four for other unspecified reasons

Women treated with glibenclamide felt that their treatment was both convenient and satisfactory The doctors in the clinic felt that there was less flexibility with glibenclamide because of its long action and therefore it was harder to control the hyperglycaemia

Jacobson

200575 ~ 19 women (8%) stopped glibenclamide (either switching to insulin or continuing without

treatment) for reasons primarily attributed to hypoglycaemia

Kahn

200663 Two women were switched from glibenclamide to insulin because of recurrent hypoglycaemia (BG

< 3.3 mmol/l despite dietary manipulation) Rochon

200683 One woman was switched from glibenclamide to insulin because of symptomatic hypoglycaemia and

one because of patient preference

Metformin

Balani

200889 11 women stopped taking metformin (intolerance in four, refusal to continue in seven)

Coetzee

198670 Two women on metformin stopped treatment because of gastrointestinal side effects; lactic

acidosis was not seen Rowan

200888 Seven women (1.9%) on metformin stopped treatment because of gastrointestinal side effects

32 women (8.8%) on metformin had their dose reduced because of gastrointestinal side effects (but 31 maintained a dose of at least 1000 mg/day) Seven women in the metformin group and three women in the insulin group stopped treatment because of withdrawing consent

No significant difference in maternal serious adverse events (infection, surgery, pelvic arthropathy) No significant difference in neonatal infection requiring hospitalisation

Questionnaire data indicated that women preferred metformin to insulin

Significantly more medication adherence in the insulin than in the metformin group (p < 0.001)

44

observational studies (no significant heterogeneity). Between 2% and 19% of neonates were SGA. Neonatal ICU admission

Glibenclamide versus insulin

One RCT found no difference in NICU admission (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.83).

Of six cohort studies reporting on NICU admission after treatment with glibenclamide or insulin (Figure 29 and below) only one, Jacobson (2005),75

found significantly more NICU admission in the insulin group than in the glibenclamide group (24% vs 15%, p = 0.008); however, NICU length of stay was significantly longer in the glibenclamide group (8.0 ± 10.1 days vs 4.3 ± 9.6 days with insulin, p = 0.002). None of the other studies found a significant difference, and there was no significant difference overall [0.75 (95% CI 0.53 to 1.05)]. The rate of NICU admission was between 6% and 25%. Other studies: Fines (2003),72

Goodman (2008)74 and Langer (2006),76 found no

significant differences.

Acarbose versus insulin

Bertini (2005)67 found no NICU admissions when

comparing acarbose with insulin groups.

Metformin versus insulin

Two RCTs reported no difference in NICU admissions or length of stay (Figure 30).

One cohort study by Balani (2008),89 published as

an abstract, found significantly more admission to the NICU in the insulin group than in the metformin group (19% vs 5%, p = 0.01). The other, Tertti (2008),56 found no significant difference in

treatment days spent at the NICU although the CIs only just overlapped with no difference (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.02).

Congenital malformations

The presence of congenital malformation might suggest pre-existing diabetes rather than GDM, since the key period for teratogenesis is in the first trimester. However, we give the figures below for reassurance. D 6WXG\RU VXEJURXS *OLEHQFODPLGH ,QVXOLQ 5LVNUDWLR

0²+UDQGRP&, 0²+UDQGRP&,5LVNUDWLR (YHQWV 7RWDO (YHQWV 7RWDO

5&7V /DQJHU WR 2EVHUYDWLRQDOVWXGLHV -DFREVRQ WR 5DPRV WR E 6WXG\RU VXEJURXS *OLEHQFODPLGH ,QVXOLQ

:HLJKW 0²+UDQGRP&,5LVNUDWLR 0²+UDQGRP&,5LVNUDWLR (YHQWV 7RWDO (YHQWV 7RWDO

&RHW]HH WR +ROW WR -DFREVRQ WR 5DPRV WR 7RWDO&, WR 7RWDOHYHQWV +HWHURJHQHLW\τ=χ=GI=S=,= 7HVWIRURYHUDOOHIIHFW]=S= )DYRXUVJOLEHQFODPLGH )DYRXUVLQVXOLQ )DYRXUVJOLEHQFODPLGH )DYRXUVLQVXOLQ

45

Glibenclamide versus insulin

Two RCTs and three cohort studies reported congenital malformations or anomalies after treatment with glibenclamide or insulin (Figure 31). There were no significant differences in congenital malformations or anomalies between the comparison groups (rates of malformations/ anomalies 0% to 10%). In the study by Ramos (2007),61 congenital abnormalities for infants in

the glibenclamide group included patent ductus arteriosus, ventricular septal defect, atrial septal defect, inguinal hernias, intestinal atresia and spine anomaly. No details were reported in the other studies.

Metformin versus insulin

One RCT and three cohort studies reported congenital malformations or anomalies after treatment with metformin or insulin (see Figure 32 and below). There were no significant differences in congenital malformations or anomalies between the comparison groups (rates of malformations/ anomalies 0% to 10%). Other studies: Balani (2008)89 showed no significant difference in rate of

congenital malformations. Respiratory distress

Glibenclamide versus insulin

The Langer (2000)68 RCT reported no difference

between groups, and the Bertini (2005)67 trial

reported that there were no reports of respiratory D

6WXG\RU VXEJURXS

0HWIRUPLQ ,QVXOLQ

5LVNUDWLR

0²+UDQGRP&, 0²+UDQGRP&,5LVNUDWLR (YHQWV 7RWDO (YHQWV 7RWDO

5&7V +DJXH WR 0RRUH WR 2EVHUYDWLRQDOVWXGLHV 7HUWWL WR $EVWUDFWV %DODQL WR E 6WXG\RU VXEJURXS 0HWIRUPLQ ,QVXOLQ

:HLJKW 0²+UDQGRP&,5LVNUDWLR 0²+UDQGRP&,5LVNUDWLR (YHQWV 7RWDO (YHQWV 7RWDO

5&7V +DJXH WR 5RZDQ WR 6XEWRWDO&, WR 7RWDOHYHQWV +HWHURJHQHLW\τ=χ=GI=S=,= 7HVWIRURYHUDOOHIIHFW]=S= 2EVHUYDWLRQDOVWXGLHV &RHW]HH WR 7HUWWL WR 6XEWRWDO&, WR 7RWDOHYHQWV +HWHURJHQHLW\τ=χ=GI=S=,= 7HVWIRURYHUDOOHIIHFW]=S= )DYRXUVPHWIRUPLQ )DYRXUVLQVXOLQ )DYRXUVPHWIRUPLQ )DYRXUVLQVXOLQ

46

6WXG\RU VXEJURXS

*OLEHQFODPLGH ,QVXOLQ

:HLJKW 0²+UDQGRP&,5LVNUDWLR 0²+UDQGRP&,5LVNUDWLR (YHQWV 7RWDO (YHQWV 7RWDO

5&7V %HUWLQL WR 6XEWRWDO&, WR 7RWDOHYHQWV +HWHURJHQHLW\1RWDSSOLFDEOH 7HVWIRURYHUDOOHIIHFW]=S= 2EVHUYDWLRQDOVWXGLHV &RHW]HH WR -DFREVRQ WR 5DPRV WR 6XEWRWDO&, WR 7RWDOHYHQWV +HWHURJHQHLW\τ=χ=GI=S=,= 7HVWIRURYHUDOOHIIHFW]=S= )DYRXUVJOLEHQFODPLGH )DYRXUVLQVXOLQ

FIGURE 26 SGA: glibenclamide versus insulin.

6WXG\RU VXEJURXS

$FDUERVH ,QVXOLQ

:HLJKW 0²+UDQGRP&,5LVNUDWLR 0²+UDQGRP&,5LVNUDWLR (YHQWV 7RWDO (YHQWV 7RWDO

%HUWLQL WR

)DYRXUVDFDUERVH )DYRXUVLQVXOLQ

FIGURE 27 SGA: acarbose versus insulin.

6WXG\RU VXEJURXS

0HWIRUPLQ ,QVXOLQ

:HLJKW 0²+UDQGRP&,5LVNUDWLR 0²+UDQGRP&,5LVNUDWLR (YHQWV 7RWDO (YHQWV 7RWDO

5&7V 5RZDQ WR 6XEWRWDO&, WR 7RWDOHYHQWV +HWHURJHQHLW\1RWDSSOLFDEOH 7HVWIRURYHUDOOHIIHFW]=S= 2EVHUYDWLRQDOVWXGLHV &RHW]HH WR 7HUWWL WR 6XEWRWDO&, WR 7RWDOHYHQWV +HWHURJHQHLW\τ=χ=GI=S=,= 7HVWIRURYHUDOOHIIHFW]=S= )DYRXUVPHWIRUPLQ )DYRXUVLQVXOLQ

47 6WXG\RU

VXEJURXS

*OLEHQFODPLGH ,QVXOLQ

:HLJKW 0²+UDQGRP&,5LVNUDWLR 0²+UDQGRP&,5LVNUDWLR (YHQWV 7RWDO (YHQWV 7RWDO

5&7V /DQJHU WR 6XEWRWDO&, WR 7RWDOHYHQWV +HWHURJHQHLW\1RWDSSOLFDEOH 7HVWIRURYHUDOOHIIHFW]=S= 2EVHUYDWLRQDOVWXGLHV +ROW WR -DFREVRQ WR 5DPRV WR 6XEWRWDO&, WR 7RWDOHYHQWV +HWHURJHQHLW\τ=χ=GI=S=,= 7HVWIRURYHUDOOHIIHFW]=S= )DYRXUVJOLEHQFODPLGH )DYRXUVLQVXOLQ

FIGURE 29 NICU admission: glibenclamide versus insulin.

6WXG\RU VXEJURXS

0HWIRUPLQ ,QVXOLQ

5LVNUDWLR

0²+UDQGRP&, 0²+UDQGRP&,5LVNUDWLR (YHQWV 7RWDO (YHQWV 7RWDO

5&7V 0RRUH WR 5RZDQ WR 2EVHUYDWLRQDOVWXGLHV 7HUWWL WR $EVWUDFWV %DODQL WR )DYRXUVPHWIRUPLQ )DYRXUVLQVXOLQ

FIGURE 30 NICU admission: metformin versus insulin.

6WXG\RU VXEJURXS

*OLEHQFODPLGH ,QVXOLQ

5LVNUDWLR

0²+UDQGRP&, 0²+UDQGRP&,5LVNUDWLR (YHQWV 7RWDO (YHQWV 7RWDO

5&7V /DQJHU WR 2JXQ\HPL WR 2EVHUYDWLRQDOVWXGLHV &RHW]HH WR -DFREVRQ WR 5DPRV WR )DYRXUVJOLEHQFODPLGH )DYRXUVLQVXOLQ

48

distress in the glibenclamide group (insulin not reported).

Langer (2000)68 reported lung complications in

8% of infants in the glibenclamide group and 6% of infants in the insulin group (no significant difference).

Four cohort studies reported on respiratory distress (Holt 200852) and oxygen/assisted ventilation

(Jacobson 200575 and Ramos 200761) (Figure

33). None of the studies reported a significant difference between groups (rates 2–9%)

Metformin versus insulin

Two RCTs reported no differences in respiratory distress after treatment with metformin or insulin. One cohort study reported the same (Figure 34). Apgar scores

Glibenclamide versus insulin

Apgar scores at 1 and 5 minutes were reported by one RCT and four cohort studies (see Figure 35 and below). Holt (2008)52 found a significantly higher

1-minute Apgar score in the insulin group than in the glibenclamide group (8.2 vs 7.3, p = 0.05). The RCT by Bertini (2005)67 found a significantly

higher 5-minute Apgar score (9.4 vs 9.0, p = 0.03) in the insulin group than in the glibenclamide group.

The Fines (2003),72 Goodman (2008)74 and

Paterson (2008)77 studies reported no significant

differences in any Apgar scores.

Acarbose versus insulin

Bertini (2005)67 did not find any significant

differences in Apgar scores at 1 or 5 minutes between the acarbose and the insulin groups. Apgar scores at 1 minute were between 8.1 and 8.4, and Apgar scores at 5 minutes were between 9.3 and 9.4 (Figure 36).

Metformin versus insulin

In the RCT by Rowan (2008),88 three neonates in

the metformin group (0.8%) and one (0.3%) in the insulin group had 5-minute Apgar scores below 7; all these infants had Apgar scores of 6.

6WXG\RU VXEJURXS

0HWIRUPLQ ,QVXOLQ

5LVNUDWLR

0²+UDQGRP&, 0²+UDQGRP&,5LVNUDWLR (YHQWV 7RWDO (YHQWV 7RWDO

5&7V 5RZDQ WR 2EVHUYDWLRQDOVWXGLHV &RHW]HH WR 7HUWWL WR )DYRXUVPHWIRUPLQ )DYRXUVLQVXOLQ

FIGURE 32 Congenital malformations/anomalies: metformin versus insulin.

6WXG\RU VXEJURXS

*OLEHQFODPLGH ,QVXOLQ

5LVNUDWLR

0²+UDQGRP&, 0²+UDQGRP&,5LVNUDWLR (YHQWV 7RWDO (YHQWV 7RWDO

5&7V /DQJHU WR 2EVHUYDWLRQDOVWXGLHV +ROW WR -DFREVRQ WR 5DPRV WR )DYRXUVJOLEHQFODPLGH )DYRXUVLQVXOLQ

49

Documento similar