PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 22, 2026Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology0 citations

Perinatal Outcomes With Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Gestational Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

View Full Paper
YWYue WangJLJiancheng LaiHZHongfei Zeng

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), with a focus on maternal and neonatal outcomes. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically searched up to March 2026 for randomized controlled trials. Pooled mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. RESULTS: Twelve studies involving 1639 women with GDM were included. The CGM use significantly improved time in range (MD = 2.52, 95% CI = 1.37 to 3.67) and was associated with a higher proportion of women requiring pharmacotherapy (RR = 1.15, 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.32). No significant differences were observed in maternal hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) (MD = -0.11, 95% CI = -0.24 to 0.01), cesarean section (RR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.85 to 1.10), large for gestational age (RR = 0.64, 95% CI = 0.40 to 1.02), macrosomia (RR = 1.13, 95% CI = 0.73 to 1.74), or neonatal hypoglycemia (RR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.67 to 1.11). CONCLUSIONS: The CGM use in women with GDM significantly improves time in range and increases the use of pharmacotherapy, but it yields no significant differences in other maternal, neonatal, or glycemic outcomes.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Wang et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a12fc1145487b7639a77d52https://doi.org/10.1177/19322968261443538
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper