Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Neonatal hypoglycemia is a common complication associated with gestational diabetes and therefore relevant to consider in evaluations of maternal treatment. We aimed to investigate the risk of neonatal hypoglycemia in offspring exposed to metformin treatment alone (MT) or combined with insulin (MIT) in comparison with nutrition therapy alone (NT), and insulin treatment alone (IT). In addition, we investigated MT in comparison with MIT. Secondary outcomes included neonatal anthropometrics, respiratory morbidity, hyperbilirubinemia, 5-min Apgar score, and preterm birth. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This Swedish population-based cohort included 16 181 women diagnosed with gestational diabetes, and their singleton offspring born in 2019-2021. We estimated risk as adjusted odds ratio (aOR) with 95% confidence interval (CI), using individual-level, linkage register-data in multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: In the main analysis, MT was associated with a lower risk of neonatal hypoglycemia vs NT (aOR 0.85, 95% CI: 0.74-0.96), vs MIT (0.74 [0.64-0.87]), and vs IT (0.47 [0.40-0.55]), whereas MIT was associated with a similar risk of neonatal hypoglycemia vs NT (1.14 [0.99-1.30]) and with lower risk vs IT (0.63 [0.53-0.75]). However, supplemental feeding rates were lower for NT vs pharmacological treatments (p < 0.001). In post hoc subgroup analyses including only exclusively breastfed offspring, the risk of neonatal hypoglycemia was modified and similar among MT and NT, and higher in MIT vs NT. Insulin exposure, alone or combined with metformin, was associated with increased risk of being large for gestational age. Compared with NT, exposure to any pharmacological treatment was associated with significantly lower risk of 5-min Apgar score < 4. All other secondary outcomes were comparable among the treatment categories. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of neonatal hypoglycemia appears to be comparable among offspring exposed to single metformin treatment and nutrition therapy alone, and the lower risk that we observed in favor of metformin is probably explained by a difference in supplemental feeding practices rather than metformin per se. By contrast, the lower risk favoring metformin exposure over insulin exposure was not explained by supplemental feeding. However, further investigations are required to determine whether the difference is an effect of metformin per se or mediated by other external factors.