MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046835408 · doi:10.1002/uog.22163

Effect of maternal diabetes on fetal heart function on echocardiography: systematic review and meta‐analysis

2020· review· en· W3046835408 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anne Louise Depla, Leon de Wit, Trinette J. Steenhuis, Martijn G. Slieker, Daphne N. Voormolen, P Scheffer, Roel de Heus, Bas B. van Rijn, Mireille N. Bekker

Bibliographic record

VenueUltrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGestational diabetesDiabetes mellitusInternal medicinePregnancyCardiologyCardiac function curveFetal echocardiographyObstetricsFetusDiastoleHeart failureGestationEndocrinologyBlood pressurePrenatal diagnosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Maternal diabetes in pregnancy is associated with structural anomalies of the fetal heart, as well as hypertrophy and functional impairment. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to estimate the effect of maternal diabetes on fetal cardiac function as measured by prenatal echocardiography. METHODS: We performed a search of the EMBASE, PubMed and The Cochrane Library databases, from inception to 4 July 2019, for studies evaluating fetal cardiac function using echocardiography in pregnancies affected by diabetes compared with uncomplicated pregnancies. Outcome measures were cardiac hypertrophy and diastolic, systolic and overall cardiac function as assessed by various ultrasound parameters. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data on interventricular septal (IVS) thickness, myocardial performance index (MPI) and E/A ratio were pooled for the meta-analysis using random-effects models. For pregnancies with diabetes, results were reported overall and according to whether diabetes was pregestational (PDM) or gestational (GDM). Results were also stratified according to the trimester in which fetal cardiac assessment was performed. RESULTS: Thirty-nine studies were included, comprising data for 2276 controls and 1925 women with pregnancy affected by diabetes mellitus (DM). Of these, 1120 had GDM, 671 had PDM and in 134 cases diabetes type was not specified. Fetal cardiac hypertrophy was more prevalent in diabetic pregnancies than in non-diabetic controls in 21/26 studies, and impaired diastolic function was observed in diabetic pregnancies in 22/28 studies. The association between DM and systolic function was inconsistent, with 10/25 studies reporting no difference between cases and controls, although more recent studies measuring cardiac deformation, i.e. strain, did show decreased systolic function in diabetic pregnancies. Of the studies measuring overall fetal cardiac function, the majority (14/21) found significant impairment in diabetic pregnancies. Results were similar when stratified according to GDM or PDM. These effects were already present in the first trimester, but were most profound in the third trimester. Meta-analysis of studies performed in the third trimester showed, compared with controls, increased IVS thickness in both PDM (mean difference, 0.75 mm (95% CI, 0.56-0.94 mm)) and GDM (mean difference, 0.65 mm (95% CI, 0.39-0.91 mm)) pregnancies, decreased E/A ratio in PDM pregnancies (mean difference, -0.09 (95% CI, -0.15 to -0.03)), no difference in E/A ratio in GDM pregnancies (mean difference, -0.01 (95% CI, -0.02 to 0.01)) and no difference in MPI in either PDM (mean difference, 0.04 (95% CI, -0.01 to 0.09)) or GDM (mean difference, 0.03 (95% CI, -0.01 to 0.06)) pregnancies. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this review show that maternal diabetes is associated with fetal cardiac hypertrophy, diastolic dysfunction and overall impaired myocardial performance on prenatal ultrasound, irrespective of whether diabetes is pregestational or gestational. Further studies are needed to demonstrate the relationship with long-term outcomes. © 2020 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.027
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations121
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUltrasound in Obstetrics and GynecologySame topicGestational Diabetes Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207