ArticleAACE endocrinology and diabetes
Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion Versus Multiple Daily Injections for Glycemic Management in Pregnant Women With Type 1 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Article in AACE endocrinology and diabetes. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/Objective: To compare glycemic management outcomes between continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) and multiple daily injections in pregnancy and assess maternal and neonatal outcomes. There is an ongoing increase in diabetes rates worldwide. The International Diabetes Federation estimated that there were 23.0 million cases of hyperglycemia (19.7%) before and during pregnancy in 2024 worldwide, causing 1.5 million deaths annually. Pregnant women with pregestational type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) struggle with 2-4 times more maternal and fetal complications than pregnant women without diabetes. Methods: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we searched PubMed MEDLINE, Cochrane, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure through January 2025. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case-control studies comparing CSII and multiple daily injection in pregnant women with T1DM. Data were pooled using random-effects models, with effect sizes expressed as mean differences (MDs), standardized mean differences, or risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs. Results: Thirty-one studies encompassing 6532 pregnant women were included. CSII was associated with improved glycosylated hemoglobin control in the first (MD, -0.34; 95% CI, -0.49 to -0.18) and second trimesters (MD, -0.15; 95% CI, -0.29 to -0.01), alongside reduced insulin requirements in early pregnancy (standardized mean difference, -0.43; 95% CI, -0.61 to -0.24). However, CSII was also linked to increased risks of cesarean delivery (RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.04-1.18), neonatal hypoglycemia (RR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.03-1.30), and large-for-gestational-age infants (RR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.11-1.34). No consistent differences were observed for preeclampsia, congenital malformations, or preterm birth. Heterogeneity across outcomes was moderate to high, reflecting variation in study design and quality. Conclusion: CSII offers measurable metabolic advantages during pregnancy by lowering glycosylated hemoglobin levels and reducing insulin needs. Nevertheless, these benefits do not consistently translate into improved maternal or neonatal outcomes and may be offset by higher obstetric and neonatal complication rates. Further well-powered randomized controlled trials are required to clarify the role of CSII and to balance metabolic gains against obstetric risks in managing pregnant women with T1DM.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.