Skip to main content
  • More from ADA
    • Diabetes Care
    • Clinical Diabetes
    • Diabetes Spectrum
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care
  • Subscribe
  • Log in
  • My Cart
  • Follow ada on Twitter
  • RSS
  • Visit ada on Facebook
Diabetes

Advanced Search

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current
    • Current Issue
    • Online Ahead of Print
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
  • Browse
    • By Topic
    • Issue Archive
    • Saved Searches
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • Diabetes COVID-19 Article Collection
    • Diabetes Symposium 2020
  • Info
    • About the Journal
    • About the Editors
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Guidance for Reviewers
  • Reprints/Reuse
  • Advertising
  • Subscriptions
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions and Site Licenses
    • Access Institutional Usage Reports
    • Purchase Single Issues
  • Alerts
    • E­mail Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Podcasts
    • Diabetes Core Update
    • Special Podcast Series: Therapeutic Inertia
    • Special Podcast Series: Influenza Podcasts
    • Special Podcast Series: SGLT2 Inhibitors
    • Special Podcast Series: COVID-19
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit Cover Art
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • ADA Peer Review
  • More from ADA
    • Diabetes Care
    • Clinical Diabetes
    • Diabetes Spectrum
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Diabetes
  • Home
  • Current
    • Current Issue
    • Online Ahead of Print
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
  • Browse
    • By Topic
    • Issue Archive
    • Saved Searches
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • Diabetes COVID-19 Article Collection
    • Diabetes Symposium 2020
  • Info
    • About the Journal
    • About the Editors
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Guidance for Reviewers
  • Reprints/Reuse
  • Advertising
  • Subscriptions
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions and Site Licenses
    • Access Institutional Usage Reports
    • Purchase Single Issues
  • Alerts
    • E­mail Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Podcasts
    • Diabetes Core Update
    • Special Podcast Series: Therapeutic Inertia
    • Special Podcast Series: Influenza Podcasts
    • Special Podcast Series: SGLT2 Inhibitors
    • Special Podcast Series: COVID-19
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit Cover Art
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • ADA Peer Review
Complications

Skin Autofluorescence of Pregnant Women With Diabetes Predicts the Macrosomia of Their Children

  1. Ninon Foussard1⇑,
  2. Audrey Cougnard-Grégoire2,
  3. Kalina Rajaobelina2,
  4. Cécile Delcourt2,
  5. Catherine Helmer2,
  6. Thierry Lamireau2,
  7. Concepcion Gonzalez1,
  8. Virginie Grouthier1,
  9. Magalie Haissaguerre1,
  10. Laurence Blanco1,
  11. Laure Alexandre1,
  12. Kamel Mohammedi1 and
  13. Vincent Rigalleau1,2
  1. 1Nutrition-Diabetology, CHU de Bordeaux, Hôpital Haut-Lévêque, Pessac, France
  2. 2University of Bordeaux, INSERM, Bordeaux Population Health Research Center, Team Lifelong Exposures Health and Aging, UMR 1219, Bordeaux, France
  1. Corresponding author: Ninon Foussard, ninonfoussard{at}yahoo.fr
Diabetes 2019 Aug; 68(8): 1663-1669. https://doi.org/10.2337/db18-0906
PreviousNext
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Advanced glycation end products (AGEs) accumulated during long-term hyperglycemia are involved in diabetes complications and can be estimated by skin autofluorescence (sAF). During pregnancy, hyperglycemia exposes women to the risk of having a macrosomic newborn. The aim of this study was to determine whether sAF of women with diabetes during a singleton pregnancy could predict macrosomia in their newborns. Using an AGE Reader, we measured the sAF at the first visit of 343 women who were referred to our diabetology department during years 2011–2015. Thirty-nine women had pregestational diabetes, 95 early gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), and 209 late GDM. Macrosomia was defined as birth weight ≥4,000 g and/or large for gestational age ≥90th percentile. Forty-six newborns were macrosomic. Their mothers had 11% higher sAF compared with other mothers: 2.03 ± 0.30 arbitrary units (AUs) vs. 1.80 ± 0.34 (P < 0.0001). Using multivariate logistic regression, the relation between sAF and macrosomia was significant (odds ratio 4.13 for 1-AU increase of sAF [95% CI 1.46–11.71]) after adjusting for several potential confounders. This relation remained significant after further adjustment for HbA1c (among 263 women with available HbA1c) and for women with GDM only. sAF of pregnant women with diabetes, a marker of long-term hyperglycemic exposure, predicts macrosomia in their newborns.

Introduction

Diabetes during pregnancy can be divided into two categories: known preexisting diabetes and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). GDM is defined as glucose intolerance with onset or first recognition during pregnancy (1). The American Diabetes Association considers that GDM represents ∼90% of all pregnancies with diabetes (1).

Diabetes during pregnancy is associated with a significant risk of adverse perinatal outcomes (2), including fetal macrosomia. There is a continuous association between maternal glucose levels and birth weight (3). Macrosomia, defined as birth weight ≥4,000 g or large for gestational age (LGA) ≥90th percentile, is the most common morbidity, occurring in 15–45% of infants exposed to hyperglycemia (4). It is critical to identify the population at risk to reduce the incidence of fetal macrosomia.

Skin autofluorescence (sAF) is a noninvasive measure by optical spectroscopy, which correlates to the skin concentrations of advanced glycation end products (AGEs) (5). Because the generation of AGEs is accelerated by hyperglycemia, sAF is considered a marker of abnormal glucose metabolism. sAF may allow the early detection of abnormal glucose tolerance in subjects at risk for prediabetes and type 2 diabetes (T2D) better than fasting plasma glucose or hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) (6). A high intrinsic fluorescence measure has been associated with dysglycemic status at the first and second trimesters in pregnant women (7), and we have reported that sAF was higher in women with pregestational diabetes than in women with GDM (8). It is not known, however, whether sAF in pregnant women with hyperglycemia may relate to macrosomia in their offspring.

In 2011–2015, we measured sAF at 26.4 ± 6.2 weeks of amenorrhea in 343 women with singleton pregnancies and diabetes (39 with pregestational diabetes and 304 with GDM). The association between sAF and macrosomia of the offspring was assessed using multiple logistic regression analysis, adjusting for the other risk factors for macrosomia.

Research Design and Methods

Study Population

We consecutively included singleton pregnant women with diabetes who were referred to the Nutrition-Diabetology unit of the University Hospital Haut-Lévêque (Bordeaux, France) between 2011 and 2015, at 26.4 ± 6.2 weeks of amenorrhea. From November 2011 to November 2012, we included 131 women who participated in our previous study (8) and for whom the birth weights of the newborns were available. From 2013 to 2015, 212 more women were included, and the birth weights of their newborns were systematically registered. The screening and diagnostic criteria for GDM, the registered variables, and the management of diabetes during pregnancy were the same for both periods of recruitment. The study was approved by the local ethics committee, and each patient provided written informed consent to participate. The diagnosis of GDM was based on the guidelines of the French Diabetes Society (9). The screening of GDM was performed if maternal age was ≥35 years or BMI ≥25 kg/m2, or if there was first-degree family history of diabetes or personal history of GDM or previous macrosomic newborn. Early GDM was diagnosed by fasting blood glucose at the first trimester ≥0.92 g/L and <1.26 g/L, and late GDM was diagnosed by an oral glucose tolerance test with 75 g of glucose at 24–28 weeks of amenorrhea (0-h blood glucose ≥0.92 g/L, 1-h ≥1.80 g/L, or 2-h ≥1.53 g/L). Some women included in the study had known pregestational diabetes or were diagnosed during pregnancy by a fasting blood glucose at the first trimester ≥1.26 g/L.

The women with GDM were managed by lifestyle intervention and medical nutrition therapy and advised to perform self-monitoring of blood glucose. Insulin was introduced if the glycemic goals (preprandial <0.95 g/L and postprandial <1.20 g/L) were not obtained. For women with pregestational diabetes, the glycemic goals were the same.

Among the studied variables, sAF was the main explanatory variable and macrosomia was the dependent variable.

sAF Measurement

During the first visit to our center, the accumulation of AGEs was estimated from sAF measured at the forearm with the AGE Reader (DiagnOptics Technologies BV, Groningen, the Netherlands) and expressed as arbitrary units (AUs). sAF was calculated by an observer-independent automated analysis, by dividing the average light intensity of the emission spectrum (300–600 nm) by the average light intensity of the excitation spectrum (300–420 nm). The reproducibility is indicated by a mean coefficient of variation ∼5%. The measurement was performed at a normal skin site of the forearm, without scars, lichenification, or other abnormalities.

Macrosomia

The birth weights and delivery dates were collected by phone call or review of obstetrical records. Centiles according to gestational age were estimated from fetal morphometric charts of the French Association des Utilisateurs de Dossiers Informatisés en Pédatrie, Obstétrique et Gynécologie. Macrosomia was defined by birth weight ≥4,000 g and/or LGA ≥90th percentile.

Other Variables

The potential explanatory variables, collected during the first consultation, included maternal age, parity, pregestational BMI, type of diabetes (pregestational diabetes and early and late GDM), systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) at inclusion (24.4 ± 6.2 weeks of gestation), family history of diabetes previous history of macrosomia, and HbA1c measured by blood test (high-performance liquid chromatography) at inclusion. The sex of newborns was collected by phone call after delivery or review of obstetric records.

Statistical Analysis

The results are presented as means ± SD for continuous variables and as numbers (percentages) for categorical variables. The relations between sAF (main explanatory variable) and macrosomia (dependent variable) as well as between potential confounders (age, SBP, DBP, weeks of amenorrhea at sAF measurement, pregestational BMI, type of diabetes [pregestational and early and late GDM], parity, family history of diabetes, sex of newborn, weeks of gestation at delivery, and previous history of macrosomia) were tested by univariate logistic regression analysis.

Multivariate logistic regression analyses adjusted on all of the variables (except previous history of macrosomia, which was included only in sensitivity analysis among women with parity ≥1) were then performed with macrosomia as a dependent variable. Supplementary analyses were also performed after defining macrosomia only by birth weight ≥4,000 g and only by LGA.

Four sensitivity analyses were performed for the women with insulin therapy status available, GDM only, HbA1c available (with inclusion of HbA1c in the model), and parity ≥1 (including a previous history of macrosomia in the model).

A P value <0.05 was considered significant. The associations were presented as odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs. All statistical analyses were performed using SAS version 9.3 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC).

Results

Characteristics of the Population

A total of 343 women participated in the study. They were 33.30 ± 5.22 years old, their pregestational BMI was 27.00 ± 6.84 kg/m2, and 160 were nulliparous. Thirty-nine women had pregestational diabetes (sAF measurement at 21.9 ± 8.2 weeks of gestation), 95 had early GDM (sAF measurement at 22.7 ± 7.2 weeks of gestation), and 209 had late GDM (sAF measurement at 29.0 ± 3.4 weeks of gestation; P < 0.001 vs. early GDM and pregestational diabetes). The birth weight was 3,225 ± 530 g, and 46 newborns were macrosomic (13.4%).

Comparison Between Mothers of Macrosomic Versus Nonmacrosomic Newborns

The comparison between mothers of macrosomic versus nonmacrosomic newborns is depicted in Table 1. The mothers of macrosomic newborns were 2 years older, they had a lower mean gestational age at the time of sAF measurement, their parity was higher, they had more frequent history of macrosomia during previous pregnancies, and pregestational diabetes was more represented among them. Familial history of diabetes, pregestational BMI, and blood pressure at inclusion were not associated with macrosomia. The mothers of macrosomic newborns had higher sAF than the other mothers: 2.03 ± 0.30 vs. 1.80 ± 0.34 AU (P < 0.0001). The relation between sAF and birth weight as a continuous variable was not significant (P = 0.18 for the whole population, P = 0.20 for women with GDM, and P = 0.69 for women with pregestational diabetes).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1

Characteristics of macrosomic and nonmacrosomic pregnancies in the total population (N = 343)

Relation Between sAF and Macrosomia: Whole Population

In multivariate logistic regression model adjusted for all of the covariables (Table 2), a higher sAF was associated with a significant increased risk of macrosomia (OR 4.13 for 1-AU increase [95% CI 1.46–11.71]). A higher parity, pregestational diabetes, and having no familial history of diabetes were also associated with an increased risk of macrosomia.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2

Association of sAF and potential confounders with macrosomia, assessed by multivariate logistic regression (n = 322; 41 with macrosomia vs. 281 without macrosomia)

Among the 46 macrosomic newborns, 24 were defined on LGA criteria alone, 3 on birth weight ≥4,000 g alone, and 19 on both criteria. The relation between sAF and a macrosomic newborn defined as LGA (n = 43 macrosomic newborns) was significant (OR 4.19 [95% CI 1.44–12.17]) after full adjustment. The relation between sAF and a ≥4,000 g newborn (n = 22 macrosomic newborns) did not reach significance (OR 2.35 [95% CI 0.54–10.26]) after these adjustments.

Sensitivity Analyses

After introducing the insulin therapy status in the multivariate model, higher sAF remained associated with an increased risk of macrosomia (OR 4.32 [95% CI 1.52–12.30]).

A total of 303 women had only GDM and not pregestational diabetes. In the sensitivity analysis performed in these women with GDM, sAF was related to macrosomia (OR 3.80 [95% CI 1.20–12.00]) after adjustment for previously mentioned confounders (Table 3).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3

Association between sAF and macrosomia in the group of women with GDM only (no pregestational diabetes), assessed by multivariate logistic regression (n = 289*; 31 with macrosomia vs. 258 without macrosomia)

HbA1c was available for 275 women with a mean (SD) of 5.3 ± 0.6% or 35.0 ± 4.0 mmol/mol. HbA1c was higher in mothers of macrosomic newborns than in other mothers (5.58 ± 0.91% or 38 ± 6.1 mmol/mol vs. 5.30 ± 0.47% or 34 ± 3.2 mmol/mol; P = 0.004). The relation between maternal sAF and macrosomia remained significant (OR 3.27 [95% CI 1.03–10.42]) after introducing the HbA1c in the multivariate model (Table 4).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 4

Association between sAF and macrosomia with further adjustment for HbA1c, assessed by multivariate logistic regression (n = 263*; 38 with macrosomia vs. 225 without macrosomia)

One hundred eighty-three women had a parity ≥1 (57%), and 33 of them had a macrosomic newborn. For these women, the relation between maternal sAF and macrosomia remained significant (OR 4.88 [95% CI 1.10–21.67]) after introducing a previous history of macrosomia (OR 3.38 [95% CI 1.16–9.82]) in the multivariate model also adjusted for all of the other covariables (Table 5).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 5

Sensitivity analysis by adjusting for macrosomia in a previous pregnancy, only in multiparous women (N = 172*; 30 with macrosomia vs. 142 without macrosomia)

Discussion

In 343 women with hyperglycemia during pregnancy, we found that sAF was 11% higher during pregnancy for mothers who later delivered a macrosomic newborn. The risk of macrosomia associated with sAF remained significant after adjusting for several potential confounding factors, including the type of diabetes (pregestational diabetes and early and late GDM), the family history of diabetes, and parity, which were also related to later macrosomia. The relation between sAF and later macrosomia also remained significant after adjusting for HbA1c when available. In the 303 women with only GDM, sAF was also related to macrosomia, and this shows that this relation was not skewed by the high sAF in women with pregestational diabetes, who are already known to have greater risk for large infants: ORs were similar between the group with GDM only and the group with all types of diabetes. Because GDM is usually managed without knowing the previous glycemic status, the prognostic value of sAF in these patients seems an important finding. In the unique previous study of sAF in pregnancy that reported perinatal outcomes, the relation between sAF and LGA babies did not reach significance, probably due to a lower number of participating women (60 patients with GDM) (10).

Fetal macrosomia is a serious problem, associated with numerous perinatal complications (11) and increased risks of obesity, T2D, and arterial hypertension in adulthood (12). The maternal age (13) and parity (14) are well known to be associated with a higher risk of macrosomia. Maternal hyperglycemia, as present in our participants, is a major risk factor for macrosomia, with a continuous relation between glucose levels during pregnancy and birth weights (15).

Despite the favorable effect of glucose control (16), high rates of macrosomia are still reported: 15% for GDM (17) to 40–50% for type 1 diabetes (T1D) (18). Macrosomia was slightly less frequent in our population (11% for GDM and 38% for pregestational diabetes), probably due to overall good glucose control. The very high rates of macrosomia in pregestational diabetes may result from higher but also earlier hyperglycemia during pregnancy. Although the third trimester HbA1c best relates to birth weight in pregnant women with T1D (19), relations with HbA1c in the second (18) or even first trimester (20) have been reported. For GDM, early diagnosis before 12 weeks of gestation (21) and early HbA1c ≥5.9% or 41 mmol/mol (22) have been related to higher birth weights. In our study, the risk of later macrosomia was fourfold increased for pregestational diabetes, whereas it was nonsignificantly increased for early GDM compared with late GDM. The relationship between glucose levels in early pregnancy and macrosomia points to the interest of a marker that could reflect previous glucose levels.

sAF reflects the accumulation of AGEs in tissues (5), which is a long-time process: the half-life of skin collagen is ∼20 years (23). We have reported that sAF related to diabetes, fasting glycemia, and HbA1c 10 years before in elderly participants from the general population in the three-city cohort (24). In patients with T1D, sAF relates to the HbA1c of the previous years (25). In pregnant hyperglycemic women, sAF is higher in cases of pregestational diabetes (10), with a gradual increase according to indicators of previous hyperglycemia, such as early GDM, and history of GDM or macrosomia in previous pregnancies (8), as recently confirmed (26). HbA1c only reflects the mean glucose levels of the three previous months, and this relation is altered in pregnancy due to changes in the turnover of hemoglobin and to iron deficiency (27): the HbA1c was not a better predictor of birth weight in the Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes (HAPO) Study, as compared with the glucose levels during oral glucose tolerance tests (15), but it was related to macrosomia in pregestational diabetes (19,28) and GDM (22). The relationship between sAF and macrosomia was, however, still significant after adjusting for HbA1c in our study. This may be due to a better value of sAF as a marker of long-term glucose memory, but it also suggests that the relation between sAF and macrosomia may not only rely on previous hyperglycemia.

High sAF in mothers of macrosomic newborns may relate to a direct effect of AGEs on the prognosis of diabetic pregnancies. In a pioneer work, Mericq et al. (29) found that the concentrations of AGEs in maternal blood correlated with their concentrations in the blood of their newborns and predicted high insulin and low adiponectin levels 1 year later. High levels of serum AGEs have been measured in pregnant diabetic animals, related to fetal development defects (30). High levels of serum AGEs were also reported in human GDM (31), related to adverse perinatal outcomes such as birth asphyxia, congenital malformations, or stillbirth (32), but not to LGA. AGEs are thought to play a role in preeclampsia (33), and high sAF was reported in former preeclamptic women (34), but they may result from, rather than precede, preeclampsia (35); in our study, blood pressures during pregnancy were not associated with macrosomia. The role of AGEs has also been suspected in neural tube defects (36) and autism (37) that have been related to diabetic pregnancies (38,39).

Some limitations of our study must be kept in mind. The sAF measurement is based on the fluorescent properties of some AGEs, correlated to their concentrations in the skin (5), but it does not directly measure their concentrations. An indirect noninvasive assessment of the accumulation of AGEs in tissues seems, however, an interesting add-on to the measurements of serum concentrations of AGEs. sAF varies with skin pigmentation, and the AGE Reader cannot reliably measure sAF of participants with phototypes 5 and 6 (black and very dark skin in practice); our population was mainly Caucasian. It has recently been reported that ethnic data improve the performance in sAF-based cardiovascular and diabetes risk estimation (40). However, we could not categorize the participants according to their ethnicity because this is not allowed by French law. Macrosomia, defined by the French Haute Autorité de Santé (41) as birth weight ≥4,000 g and/or LGA, is an imperfect criteria. Birth weight does not consider the gestational age, and LGA is based on reference charts that do not take account of factors that may influence fetal growth, such as ethnicity, maternal morphology, and parity. The birth weight, delivery date, or sex of the newborn was sometimes collected by phone call (10% of the total data). Gestational weight gain and HbA1c at the end of pregnancy were not available. The sAF was not measured at the same time of pregnancy for all of the participating women, but we do not think that this could affect the validity of our analyses because de Ranitz-Greven et al. (10), who performed repeated measurements, reported a slight decrease during normal pregnancies but no significant change of sAF in pregnant women with diabetes. Our study does not have a control group composed of pregnant women without hyperglycemia, as this type of patient is not referred to our diabetology department.

In summary, our work shows that sAF, a surrogate marker of AGE accumulation in tissues, is predictive of macrosomia in the offspring of pregnant women with diabetes. sAF has already been shown to predict long-term vascular complications in both T1D (42) and T2D (43) due to its value as a marker of the memory of hyperglycemia, due to the direct deleterious effects of the accumulated AGEs, or both. As its measurement is simple and noninvasive, sAF seems a promising biomarker for the prediction of diabetic complications in pregnancy.

Article Information

Duality of Interest. No potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported.

Author Contributions. N.F. is the corresponding author, researched data, and wrote the manuscript. A.C.-G. performed all of the statistical analyses and reviewed the manuscript. K.R., C.G., V.G., and L.B. researched data and reviewed the manuscript. C.D., C.H., T.L., M.H., L.A., and K.M. reviewed the manuscript. V.R. researched data and wrote the manuscript. V.R. is the guarantor of this work and, as such, had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Prior Presentation. This study was presented in poster form at the 78th Scientific Sessions of the American Diabetes Association, Orlando, FL, 22–26 June 2018.

  • Received August 22, 2018.
  • Accepted May 18, 2019.
  • © 2019 by the American Diabetes Association.
http://www.diabetesjournals.org/content/license

Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered. More information is available at http://www.diabetesjournals.org/content/license.

References

  1. ↵
    1. American Diabetes Association
    . Diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care 2007;30(Suppl. 1):S42–S47pmid:17192378
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    1. Metzger BE,
    2. Lowe LP,
    3. Dyer AR, et al.; HAPO Study Cooperative Research Group
    . Hyperglycemia and adverse pregnancy outcomes. N Engl J Med 2008;358:1991–2002pmid:18463375
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  3. ↵
    1. HAPO Study Cooperative Research Group
    . Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome (HAPO) Study: associations with neonatal anthropometrics. Diabetes 2009;58:453–459pmid:19011170
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. ↵
    1. Catalano PM,
    2. McIntyre HD,
    3. Cruickshank JK, et al.; HAPO Study Cooperative Research Group
    . The Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome Study: associations of GDM and obesity with pregnancy outcomes. Diabetes Care 2012;35:780–786pmid:22357187
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    1. Meerwaldt R,
    2. Graaff R,
    3. Oomen PHN, et al
    . Simple non-invasive assessment of advanced glycation endproduct accumulation. Diabetologia 2004;47:1324–1330pmid:15243705
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  6. ↵
    1. Maynard JD,
    2. Rohrscheib M,
    3. Way JF,
    4. Nguyen CM,
    5. Ediger MN
    . Noninvasive type 2 diabetes screening: superior sensitivity to fasting plasma glucose and A1C. Diabetes Care 2007;30:1120–1124pmid:17337498
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. ↵
    1. Azar M,
    2. Stoner JA,
    3. Dao HD, et al
    . Epidemiology of dysglycemia in pregnant Oklahoma American Indian women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2015;100:2996–3003pmid:26091203
    OpenUrlPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Maury E,
    2. Savel J,
    3. Grouthier V, et al
    . Is skin autofluorescence a marker of metabolic memory in pregnant women with diabetes? Diabet Med 2015;32:1575–1579pmid:25981634
    OpenUrlPubMed
  9. ↵
    Collège national des gynécologues et obstétriciens français; Société francophone du diabète. Gestational diabetes. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 2010;39(Suppl. 2):S139, S338–S342 [in French]
  10. ↵
    1. de Ranitz-Greven WL,
    2. Kaasenbrood L,
    3. Poucki WK, et al
    . Advanced glycation end products, measured as skin autofluorescence, during normal pregnancy and pregnancy complicated by diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Technol Ther 2012;14:1134–1139pmid:23113747
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Chauhan SP,
    2. Rice MM,
    3. Grobman WA, et al.; MSCE, for the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units (MFMU) Network
    . Neonatal morbidity of small- and large-for-gestational-age neonates born at term in uncomplicated pregnancies.Obstet Gynecol 2017;130:511–519pmid:28796674
    OpenUrlPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Boney CM,
    2. Verma A,
    3. Tucker R,
    4. Vohr BR
    . Metabolic syndrome in childhood: association with birth weight, maternal obesity, and gestational diabetes mellitus. Pediatrics 2005;115:e290–e296pmid:15741354
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. ↵
    1. Rao J,
    2. Fan D,
    3. Wu S, et al
    . Trend and risk factors of low birth weight and macrosomia in south China, 2005-2017: a retrospective observational study. Sci Rep 2018;8:3393pmid:29467433
    OpenUrlPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. Koyanagi A,
    2. Zhang J,
    3. Dagvadorj A, et al
    . Macrosomia in 23 developing countries: an analysis of a multicountry, facility-based, cross-sectional survey. Lancet 2013;381:476–483pmid:23290494
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  15. ↵
    1. Moses RG,
    2. Calvert D
    . Pregnancy outcomes in women without gestational diabetes mellitus related to the maternal glucose level. Is there a continuum of risk? Diabetes Care 1995;18:1527–1533pmid:8722047
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. ↵
    1. Landon MB,
    2. Spong CY,
    3. Thom E, et al.; Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network
    . A multicenter, randomized trial of treatment for mild gestational diabetes. N Engl J Med 2009;361:1339–1348pmid:19797280
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  17. ↵
    1. Billionnet C,
    2. Mitanchez D,
    3. Weill A, et al
    . Gestational diabetes and adverse perinatal outcomes from 716,152 births in France in 2012. Diabetologia 2017;60:636–644pmid:28197657
    OpenUrlPubMed
  18. ↵
    1. Ladfors L,
    2. Shaat N,
    3. Wiberg N,
    4. Katasarou A,
    5. Berntorp K,
    6. Kristensen K
    . Fetal overgrowth in women with type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus. PLoS One 2017;12:e0187917pmid:29121112
    OpenUrlPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. Cyganek K,
    2. Skupien J,
    3. Katra B, et al
    . Risk of macrosomia remains glucose-dependent in a cohort of women with pregestational type 1 diabetes and good glycemic control. Endocrine 2017;55:447–455pmid:27726091
    OpenUrlPubMed
  20. ↵
    1. Rey E,
    2. Attié C,
    3. Bonin A
    . The effects of first-trimester diabetes control on the incidence of macrosomia. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999;181:202–206pmid:10411820
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  21. ↵
    1. Sweeting AN,
    2. Ross GP,
    3. Hyett J, et al
    . Gestational diabetes mellitus in early pregnancy: evidence for poor pregnancy outcomes despite treatment. Diabetes Care 2016;39:75–81pmid:26645084
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. ↵
    1. Mañé L,
    2. Flores-Le Roux JA,
    3. Benaiges D, et al
    . Role of first trimester HbA1c as a predictor of adverse obstetric outcomes in a multi-ethnic cohort. J Clin Endocrinol Metab2017;102:390–397
    OpenUrl
  23. ↵
    1. Verzijl N,
    2. DeGroot J,
    3. Thorpe SR, et al
    . Effect of collagen turnover on the accumulation of advanced glycation end products. J Biol Chem 2000;275:39027–39031pmid:10976109
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  24. ↵
    1. Rajaobelina K,
    2. Cougnard-Gregoire A,
    3. Delcourt C,
    4. Gin H,
    5. Barberger-Gateau P,
    6. Rigalleau V.
    Autofluorescence of skin advanced glycation end products: marker of metabolic memory in elderly population. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2015;70:841–846
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. ↵
    1. Genevieve M,
    2. Vivot A,
    3. Gonzalez C, et al
    . Skin autofluorescence is associated with past glycaemic control and complications in type 1 diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Metab 2013;39:349–354pmid:23643347
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  26. ↵
    1. Cosson E,
    2. Gary F,
    3. Nguyen MT, et al
    . Gradual increase in advanced glycation end-products from no diabetes to early and regular gestational diabetes: a case-control study. Diabetes Metab. 2 February 2018 [Epub ahead of print]. DOI: 10.1016/j.diabet.2018.01.007pmid:29402596
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. ↵
    1. Kurishita M,
    2. Nakashima K,
    3. Kozu H
    . Glycated hemoglobin of fractionated erythrocytes, glycated albumin, and plasma fructosamine during pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992;167:1372–1378pmid:1442993
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  28. ↵
    1. Glinianaia SV,
    2. Tennant PWG,
    3. Bilous RW,
    4. Rankin J,
    5. Bell R
    . HbA(1c) and birthweight in women with pre-conception type 1 and type 2 diabetes: a population-based cohort study. Diabetologia 2012;55:3193–3203pmid:23015260
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. ↵
    1. Mericq V,
    2. Piccardo C,
    3. Cai W, et al
    . Maternally transmitted and food-derived glycotoxins: a factor preconditioning the young to diabetes? Diabetes Care 2010;33:2232–2237pmid:20628088
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  30. ↵
    1. Tang X,
    2. Qin Q,
    3. Xie X,
    4. He P
    . Protective effect of sRAGE on fetal development in pregnant rats with gestational diabetes mellitus. Cell Biochem Biophys 2015;71:549–556pmid:25205260
    OpenUrlPubMed
  31. ↵
    1. Li S,
    2. Yang H
    . Relationship between advanced glycation end products and gestational diabetes mellitus. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2018;21:1–7pmid:29560756
    OpenUrlPubMed
  32. ↵
    1. Guosheng L,
    2. Hongmei S,
    3. Chuan N,
    4. Haiying L,
    5. Xiaopeng Z,
    6. Xianqiong L
    . The relationship of serum AGE levels in diabetic mothers with adverse fetal outcome. J Perinatol 2009;29:483–488pmid:19279648
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. ↵
    1. Chekir C,
    2. Nakatsuka M,
    3. Noguchi S, et al
    . Accumulation of advanced glycation end products in women with preeclampsia: possible involvement of placental oxidative and nitrative stress. Placenta 2006;27:225–233pmid:16338468
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  34. ↵
    1. Coffeng SM,
    2. Blaauw J,
    3. Souwer ETD, et al
    . Skin autofluorescence as marker of tissue advanced glycation end-products accumulation in formerly preeclamptic women. Hypertens Pregnancy 2011;30:231–242pmid:20701478
    OpenUrlPubMed
  35. ↵
    1. Foussard N,
    2. Cougnard-Gregoire A,
    3. Rajaobelina K, et al
    . Comment on Kelly et al. Subclinical first trimester renal abnormalities are associated with preeclampsia in normoalbuminuric women with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2018;41:120-127 (Letter). Diabetes Care 2018;41:e101pmid:29784705
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  36. ↵
    1. Li R,
    2. Yang P,
    3. Chen X,
    4. Wang L
    . Maternal serum AGEs levels in pregnancies associated with neural tube defects. Int J Dev Neurosci 2014;33:57–61pmid:24345611
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  37. ↵
    1. Barua M,
    2. Jenkins EC,
    3. Chen W,
    4. Kuizon S,
    5. Pullarkat RK,
    6. Junaid MA
    . Glyoxalase I polymorphism rs2736654 causing the Ala111Glu substitution modulates enzyme activity--implications for autism. Autism Res 2011;4:262–270pmid:21491613
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  38. ↵
    1. Sukanya S,
    2. Bay BH,
    3. Tay SS,
    4. Dheen ST
    . Frontiers in research on maternal diabetes-induced neural tube defects: past, present and future. World J Diabetes 2012;3:196–200pmid:23301121
    OpenUrlPubMed
  39. ↵
    1. Xiang AH,
    2. Wang X,
    3. Martinez MP, et al
    . Association of maternal diabetes with autism in offspring. JAMA 2015;313:1425–1434pmid:25871668
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. ↵
    1. Ahmad MS,
    2. Kimhofer T,
    3. Ahmad S, et al
    . Ethnicity and skin autofluorescence-based risk-engines for cardiovascular disease and diabetes mellitus. PLoS One 2017;12:e0185175pmid:28931094
    OpenUrlPubMed
  41. ↵
    Haute Autorité de Santé. Indications de la césarienne programmée à terme, Méthode recommandations pour la pratique clinique, argumentaire scientifique [Internet], 2012. Available from https://www.has-sante.fr/portail/upload/docs/application/pdf/2012-03/indications_cesarienne_programme_-_argumentaire.pdf. Accessed 9 January 2019
  42. ↵
    1. Vélayoudom-Céphise F-L,
    2. Rajaobelina K,
    3. Helmer C, et al
    . Skin autofluorescence predicts cardio-renal outcome in type 1 diabetes: a longitudinal study. Cardiovasc Diabetol 2016;15:127pmid:27585632
    OpenUrlPubMed
  43. ↵
    1. Gerrits EG,
    2. Lutgers HL,
    3. Kleefstra N, et al
    . Skin autofluorescence: a tool to identify type 2 diabetic patients at risk for developing microvascular complications. Diabetes Care 2008;31:517–521pmid:18039805
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top
Diabetes: 68 (8)

In this Issue

August 2019, 68(8)
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by Author
  • Masthead (PDF)
Sign up to receive current issue alerts
View Selected Citations (0)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about Diabetes.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Skin Autofluorescence of Pregnant Women With Diabetes Predicts the Macrosomia of Their Children
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Diabetes
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the Diabetes web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Skin Autofluorescence of Pregnant Women With Diabetes Predicts the Macrosomia of Their Children
Ninon Foussard, Audrey Cougnard-Grégoire, Kalina Rajaobelina, Cécile Delcourt, Catherine Helmer, Thierry Lamireau, Concepcion Gonzalez, Virginie Grouthier, Magalie Haissaguerre, Laurence Blanco, Laure Alexandre, Kamel Mohammedi, Vincent Rigalleau
Diabetes Aug 2019, 68 (8) 1663-1669; DOI: 10.2337/db18-0906

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Add to Selected Citations
Share

Skin Autofluorescence of Pregnant Women With Diabetes Predicts the Macrosomia of Their Children
Ninon Foussard, Audrey Cougnard-Grégoire, Kalina Rajaobelina, Cécile Delcourt, Catherine Helmer, Thierry Lamireau, Concepcion Gonzalez, Virginie Grouthier, Magalie Haissaguerre, Laurence Blanco, Laure Alexandre, Kamel Mohammedi, Vincent Rigalleau
Diabetes Aug 2019, 68 (8) 1663-1669; DOI: 10.2337/db18-0906
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Research Design and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Article Information
    • References
  • Figures & Tables
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Interphotoreceptor Retinol-Binding Protein Ameliorates Diabetes-Induced Retinal Dysfunction and Neurodegeneration Through Rhodopsin
  • Lung and Kidney ACE2 and TMPRSS2 in Renin-Angiotensin System Blocker–Treated Comorbid Diabetic Mice Mimicking Host Factors That Have Been Linked to Severe COVID-19
  • Specific NLRP3 Inhibition Protects Against Diabetes-Associated Atherosclerosis
Show more Complications

Similar Articles

Navigate

  • Current Issue
  • Online Ahead of Print
  • Scientific Sessions Abstracts
  • Collections
  • Archives
  • Submit
  • Subscribe
  • Email Alerts
  • RSS Feeds

More Information

  • About the Journal
  • Instructions for Authors
  • Journal Policies
  • Reprints and Permissions
  • Advertising
  • Privacy Policy: ADA Journals
  • Copyright Notice/Public Access Policy
  • Contact Us

Other ADA Resources

  • Diabetes Care
  • Clinical Diabetes
  • Diabetes Spectrum
  • Scientific Sessions Abstracts
  • Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes
  • BMJ Open - Diabetes Research & Care
  • Professional Books
  • Diabetes Forecast

 

  • DiabetesJournals.org
  • Diabetes Core Update
  • ADA's DiabetesPro
  • ADA Member Directory
  • Diabetes.org

© 2021 by the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Print ISSN: 0012-1797, Online ISSN: 1939-327X.