Scholarlink

Aims <p>Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) benefits pregnant women with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, but its role in gestational diabetes (GDM) remains uncertain. We aimed to compare the effects of CGM with self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) on glycemic, maternal, and neonatal outcomes in women with GDM.</p> Methods <p>We compared CGM with SMBG in women with GDM through a systematic search across randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Scopus. We evaluated glycemic, maternal and neonatal outcomes using a random-effects model.</p> Results <p>Eleven RCTs (n = 1225) met inclusion criteria. The use of CGM increased the likelihood of achieving appropriate maternal weight gain (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.82; I<sup>2</sup> = 0%) and reduced mean neonatal birth weight (MD − 122.79&#xa0;g, 95% CI − 189.78 to − 55.79; I<sup>2</sup> = 0%). CGM use did not change maternal time in range (TIR), time above range (TAR), time below range (TBR), glycated hemoglobin, gestational hypertension, cesarean delivery, macrosomia, preterm delivery, neonatal hypoglycemia, or neonatal intensive care unit admissions.</p> Conclusions <p>In women with GDM, the use of CGM improved the likelihood of appropriate maternal weight gain and lowered neonatal birth weight compared with SMBG, but it did not improve overall glycemic control or other maternal and fetal outcomes.</p> Trial registration <p>PROSPERO CRD420251044960 (registered 2025).</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Continuous glucose monitoring versus self-monitoring of blood glucose in gestational diabetes: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年1月27日

查看全文
  • Naveen Gautam,
  • Bruno Lins de Souza,
  • Jessica Abramowitz,
  • Denise Machado Mourão,
  • Sasan Mirfakhraee,
  • Marconi Abreu

摘要

Aims

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) benefits pregnant women with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, but its role in gestational diabetes (GDM) remains uncertain. We aimed to compare the effects of CGM with self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) on glycemic, maternal, and neonatal outcomes in women with GDM.

Methods

We compared CGM with SMBG in women with GDM through a systematic search across randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Scopus. We evaluated glycemic, maternal and neonatal outcomes using a random-effects model.

Results

Eleven RCTs (n = 1225) met inclusion criteria. The use of CGM increased the likelihood of achieving appropriate maternal weight gain (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.82; I2 = 0%) and reduced mean neonatal birth weight (MD − 122.79 g, 95% CI − 189.78 to − 55.79; I2 = 0%). CGM use did not change maternal time in range (TIR), time above range (TAR), time below range (TBR), glycated hemoglobin, gestational hypertension, cesarean delivery, macrosomia, preterm delivery, neonatal hypoglycemia, or neonatal intensive care unit admissions.

Conclusions

In women with GDM, the use of CGM improved the likelihood of appropriate maternal weight gain and lowered neonatal birth weight compared with SMBG, but it did not improve overall glycemic control or other maternal and fetal outcomes.

Trial registration

PROSPERO CRD420251044960 (registered 2025).