-VISIT OUR OTHER FORUMS- OB-GYN-L Ultrasound Ultrasound History Fibroid Forum Physicians-in-Training Tech Talk OBSTET-L (portuguese) OBGIN-L (spanish) Nursing

Re: Impaired Glucose Tolerance vs Gestational Diabetes - treatment? From: ainsron (ainsron@sbcglobal.net) Thu Nov 10 11:12:54 2005 Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ] Next message: R. Daniel Braun: "Re: Twins and VBAC" Previous message: ainsron: "Re: Impaired Glucose Tolerance vs Gestational Diabetes - treatment?" In reply to: Robert J. Carpenter, Jr. MD: "Re: Impaired Glucose Tolerance vs Gestational Diabetes - treatment?" Next in thread: DoctorJoe@aol.com: "Re: Impaired Glucose Tolerance vs Gestational Diabetes - treatment?" You're right, I've never used the 75gm test, except in postpartum women. I was surprised to see it mentioned by the ADA as an alternative, but it is. Ronald E. Ainsworth, MD, FACOG -----Original Message----- From: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net [mailto:ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net] On Behalf Of Robert J. Carpenter, Jr. MD Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 7:54 PM To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L Subject: Re: Impaired Glucose Tolerance vs Gestational Diabetes - treatment? The 75 gm WHO std is not the std for dx in the US. Additionally the present of 1 elevated value in a large study from Italy years ago (the 2hr value) showed that increasing value correlated with increased size and increased c/s rate (Tallerigho - sp?). If GDM is dx, then retesting at 8-10wks PP with the 75gm WHO std is appropriate for determination of class of glu tolerance On 8 Nov 2005 at 15:12, ainsron wrote: > Here's the position paper from the American Diabetes Association: > http://care.diabetesjournals.org/cgi/content/full/26/suppl_1/s103 > > If they IFG (impaired fasting glucose) or IGT (Impaired glucose > tolerance) the recommendations only suggest retesting postpartum and > annually. Retesting later in pregnancy, ~34 wks is also reasonable. > > Ronald E. Ainsworth, MD, FACOG > > -----Original Message----- > From: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net [mailto:ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net] On Behalf Of > Natalie Melanson, RM Sent: Monday, November 07, 2005 6:28 PM To: > Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L Subject: Impaired Glucose > Tolerance vs Gestational Diabetes - treatment? > > First a brief intro: I am a registered midwife working in a group > practice in Northern Ontario, Canada. > > Notwithstanding the controversy surrounding even screening for GDM - > at our practice we do screening based on risk factors - I am wondering > what everyone's treatment protocol is regarding confirmed Gestational > Diabetes vs "just" Impaired Glucose Tolerance of pregnancy, ie. only > one elevated value on 75g GTT that is NOT diagnostic of GDM. Do you > do the same diet counseling, glucose monitoring, fetal monitoring in > the last trimester, etc? My feeling is that diet counseling should be > enough for IGT and then perhaps repeat the test after a month or so of > dietary changes. > > thanks, > > Natalie Melanson, RM > Sudbury Community Midwifery Practice > Sudbury, Ontario > Robert J. Carpenter, Jr. MD 6624 Fannin, #2720 St. Luke's Medical Tower Houston,TX 77030-2339 713-795-4600 Next message: R. Daniel Braun: "Re: Twins and VBAC" Previous message: ainsron: "Re: Impaired Glucose Tolerance vs Gestational Diabetes - treatment?" In reply to: Robert J. Carpenter, Jr. MD: "Re: Impaired Glucose Tolerance vs Gestational Diabetes - treatment?" Next in thread: DoctorJoe@aol.com: "Re: Impaired Glucose Tolerance vs Gestational Diabetes - treatment?"

Return to

Mail a New Message to the Forum: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: geffrey.klein@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Mon Nov 2 05:00:21 2009

The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.