1. Introduction
In adults, vitamin D deficiency (VDD) is defined as a 25-hydroxivitamin D (25(OH)D) serum level below 20 ng/mL and vitamin D insufficiency between 20 and 30 ng/mL [1]. There is recent evidence that VDD is a reality both in Spain and globally [2,3,4]. VDD is found in 40.4% of the general population in Europe and 26.0% in the United States of America [5]. Vitamin D levels are similar in the Spanish and European populations [6]. VDD has been described in all ages and genders, in a similar fashion around the globe, including in very sunny regions in Mediterranean countries [7].
Globally, VDD is found in 54% of pregnancies and in 75% of newborns. This affects pregnant women of all latitudes, not only those with lower exposure to sunlight. In Europe, the VDD prevalence in pregnancy is 57%, while it is 73% in newborns [8]. Despite the mentioned high frequency of VDD, there is no consensus about the need for 25(OH)D level evaluation or the requirement of supplementation in pregnancy [9].
VDD has been linked to the occurrence of several adverse events during pregnancy, such as preeclampsia, gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), preterm birth, and birth by cesarean section. Consequences in newborns include a low weight at birth, a small head circumference, and neurodevelopmental problems [9,10,11]. A recent systematic review compared vitamin D supplementation with a placebo/control and found a reduction in the relative risk of preeclampsia, GMD, and low weight at birth (<2500 g). However, no difference in the risk of preterm birth (<37 weeks) was detected [9].
GDM characterizes a population of women at high risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus, representing an early stage in the natural history of the disease [12]. It has been postulated that vitamin D could be key to hepatic metabolism regulation, function, and the development of pancreatic islands, calcium levels in the blood, oxidative stress, and the immune and inflammatory systems that mediate the start of GDM [13]. VDD could be an independent cardiovascular risk factor and a marker of metabolic syndrome [14], as per other existing biomarkers of metabolic syndrome and insulin resistance, such as “homeostasis model of assessment—insulin resistance” (HOMA-IR), levels of fasting insulin, fasting glycemia, C-reactive protein, fibrinogen, and lipid profile, among others [15].
GDM is a highly prevalent disease, with a frequency of 7–12% in the Spanish pregnant women population [16]. This prevalence is associated with body mass index (BMI), with a frequency of 10.2% for a BMI > 25 and 16.7% for a BMI > 30 [17].
Our main objective was to determine if VDD is associated with GDM, independent of BMI. In addition, the secondary endpoint was whether VDD and BMI are associated with a higher occurrence of secondary obstetric or neonatal events.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Population
We performed a population-based, single-center, observational, cross-sectional, and analytic study. To achieve the secondary endpoint, a longitudinal follow-up was completed for all participating women, until the completion of pregnancy. All pregnant women in the Health Department were invited to participate. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Hospital General Universitario Elda (protocol code VITD), and all participants signed an informed consent form prior to inclusion.
Exhaustive consecutive sampling was carried out from September 2019 to July 2020, with the only inclusion criterion being the state of gestation in the second trimester of pregnancy. Multiple pregnancies and a personal history of pregestational diabetes mellitus (type 1 or 2) were considered as exclusion criteria.
2.2. Data Collection
Data were collected in a 10-month period via anonymized data sheets, in a retrospective and prospective way, depending on the variable.
2.2.1. Assessment of Vitamin D Levels
Blood samples were taken during the routine visit in the second trimester, in conjunction with a GDM screening test. The 25(OH)D serum concentration was determined by an automated electro-chemiluminescent binding assay (Modular Analytics E170 and Elecsys Vitamin D Total II, Roche Diagnostics, GmBH (Manheim, Germany)), with a measurement range from 3 to 70 ng/dL. This test has previously been validated against liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS), and it has been certified by the CDC Vitamin D Standardization-Certification Program (VDSCP) [18,19,20,21,22].
VDD was defined as a serum concentration <20 ng/mL [1,23]. In the case of VDD, 480 UI of calcidiol per day was supplemented until the end of pregnancy.
2.2.2. Assessment of GDM
GDM diagnosis was completed in two steps, following the Carpenter and Coustan criteria [24] as proposed in the 4th Workshop-Conference on Gestational Diabetes Mellitus [25] and by the American Diabetes Association [26]. A positive screening test (O’Sullivan test) was followed by an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) with 100 g of glucose, assessing 0 h, 1 h, 2 h, and 3 h glycemia. If ≥ 2 values were higher than the cut-off value at any time of the OGTT (glycemia cut-off points: 0 h > 95 mg/dL, 1 h > 180 mg/dL, 2 h > 155 mg/dL, and 3 h >140 mg/dL), the diagnosis of GDM was established. These criteria have been previously validated in the Spanish population [27].
2.2.3. Assessment of BMI
BMI was calculated from the weight (in kg) and height (in m) measurements registered in the routine visit of the first trimester of pregnancy. According to BMI, the women were classified as normal (<25), overweight (25–30), and obese (>30), following the World Health Organization’s classification [28].
2.2.4. Assessment of Covariates
In the first-trimester control visit, medical history and physical evaluation were completed, collecting sociodemographic and pregnancy-related data, including maternal age (in years), smoking habit, hypothyroidism, ethnicity, weight (in kg), height (in m), parity, and previous history of cesarean section.
In the second trimester, coinciding with the 20-week ultrasound examination, a survey was filled out (St. Carlos Study questionnaire) to assess physical activity, nutritional habits, and lifestyle, presented as scores. This questionnaire is based on the American Diabetes Association (ADA) evidence-based nutrition recommendations, adapted to the Spanish population following the Diabetes Nutrition and Complications Trial (DNCT), and it has been validated in our population [29,30]. The routine second trimester blood test included: C-reactive protein (CRP) (in mg/dL), ferritin (in mg/dL), total cholesterol (in mg/dL), HDL cholesterol (in mg/dL), LDL cholesterol (in mg/dL), triglycerides (in mg/dL), fibrinogen (in mg/dL), hemoglobin (in g/dL), and hematocrit (in %).
After the delivery, all of the other variables studied were collected: gestational hypothyroidism, preterm birth, preeclampsia, birth by cesarean section, newborn admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), and newborn weight, height, and head circumference percentiles (based on Spanish growth charts).
2.3. Statistical Analysis
A descriptive analysis explored the distribution of the study variables, with frequency calculations for categorical variables and mean and standard deviations for continuous variables. A pairwise methodology was employed for missing data management. For the sociodemographic variables, the 95% confidence intervals were calculated with the Wilson method for proportions and the asymptotic method for continuous variables. Factors associated with GDM and VDD were analyzed with contingency tables. The qualitative variables were compared using the chi-square test, and Student’s t-test was used for quantitative variables.
To estimate the magnitude of associations with GDM, crude and adjusted Poisson regression models with robust variance were developed, and the prevalence ratio (PR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. The predicted variables were selected following a stepwise regression method, and the best-adjusted model was based on the Akaike Information Criterion. The level of statistical significance was considered at a p-value of <0.05 for the primary endpoint and <0.025 for the secondary endpoint, with Bonferroni adjustments for two variables.
All analyses were performed using IBM SPSS v.26 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) and the free software environment for statistical computing and graphics R v.4.0.2 [31].
3. Results
3.1. Characteristics of the Study Participants
In the study period, a total of 923 pregnant women were eligible for inclusion. Thirty-seven were excluded, for an entire sample of 886, although serum 25(OH)D levels were only obtained for 881. In Table 1, the participants’ characteristics are described in relation to GDM.
Among the study participants, the number of women with GDM accounted for 10.5% (95%CI = 8.6–12.7). The mean serum 25(OH)D concentration of the entire sample was 19.3 (8.9) ng/mL (95%CI = 18.7–19.9). In total, 55.5% (95%CI = 51.9–58.4) of the pregnant women presented with VDD. The mean age was 32.0 (5.8) years (95%CI = 31.6–32.4), and the mean BMI value was 24.8 (4.8) (95% CI = 24.5–25.1). The distribution of BMI into groups resulted in 60.4% normal weight (95%CI = 56.8–63.2), followed by 26.6% overweight (95%CI = 23.6–29.4) and 13.0% (95%CI = 10.9–15.4) obese. A maternal smoking habit was present in 10.3% (95% CI = 8.4–12.4) of the entire sample. Caucasian ethnicity represented 86.7% (95%CI = 84.0–88.6). Primigravida accounted for 50.3% (95%CI = 47.1–53.6), two pregnancies for 37.5% (95%CI = 34.3–40.7), and three or more pregnancies for 12.2% (95%CI = 10.2–14.5) of the sample. A previous cesarean section was found in 11.1% (95%CI = 9.2–13.3) of the participants.
Figure 1 depicts the distribution of the individual values of 25(OH)D, in relation to BMI, highlighting women with GDM. Horizontal dotted lines represent the limit for considering VDD, and vertical lines represent limits for the BMI groups. There was a high density of women with VDD and GDM, with a lower density of overweight or obese women with GDM.
In the univariate analysis (Table 1), the participants were compared according to the presence of GDM. The GDM group showed lower mean values for 25(OH)D (p = 0.021) and a higher prevalence for VDD (68.2% vs. 54.1%, p = 0.012). In addition, in the comparison of continuous variables, those pregnancies with GDM presented significantly older ages (p < 0.001), higher BMIs (p < 0.001), higher levels of SAP (p < 0.001) and DAP (p < 0.001) in the first trimester, lower levels of HDL cholesterol (p = 0.034), and higher levels of triglycerides (p < 0.001), C-reactive protein (p = 0.005), and fibrinogen (p < 0.001). In the qualitative analysis, the frequency of ethnicity was different, with Caucasians being more frequent in the non-GDM group (p = 0.045). In accordance with BMI, significant differences were observed, and the proportion of obese women was much higher in the GDM group (32.2% vs. 10.8%, p < 0.001). No significant differences were detected in the remaining variables.
Figure 2 represents the mean serum 25(OH)D levels in relation to the BMI group, grouped by the presence of GDM. In the absence of GDM, the 25(OH)D levels were significantly lower in the obesity group (CI95%, 15.2–18.5) than in the normal-weight group (CI95%, 19.6–21.3, p < 0.001). The trend was similar in the presence of GDM, although not achieving statistical significance (p = 0.376).
3.2. Assessment of the Association between VDD and GDM: Relationship with BMI
An association study between VDD and GDM was performed by multivariate analysis, using Poisson regression-adjusted models with robust variance. The prevalence ratio (PR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated (Table 2).
In the crude model, VDD was significantly associated with an increased prevalence of GDM (95%CI = 1.119–2.637; p = 0.013). Obesity was also associated with GDM (95%CI = 2.212–5.181; p < 0.001), but not solely overweight (95%CI = 0.744–2.001; p = 0.431). The other variables associated with GDM were older age (95%CI = 1.035–1.122; p < 0.001) and higher levels of triglycerides (95%CI = 1.004–1.007; p < 0.001), fibrinogen (95%CI = 1.005–1.011; p < 0.001), SAP (95%CI = 1.025–1.060; p < 0.001), and DAP (95%CI = 1.032–1.079; p < 0.001) in the first trimester and lower levels of HDL cholesterol (95%CI = 0.970–0.997; p = 0.019). Other ethnicities compared to Caucasian were also associated with GDM (95%CI = 1.169–3.665; p = 0.013).
There was no association with any of the other variables analyzed, noting the absence of an association with maternal variables such as smoking habit, history of hypothyroidism, or score in the physical activity, nutritional habits, or lifestyle items in the questionnaire.
In Model 1, which included exclusively VDD and BMI as an explanatory model of independent variables, both variables were significant. The prevalence ratio for VDD was 1.567 (95%CI = 1.016–2.417, p = 0.042), while for obesity, it was 2.992 (95%CI = 1.907–4.694; p < 0.001).
In Model 2, adjusted for all significant variables, the obese group lost its statistical significance. When fitted by age (p = 0.003), triglycerides (p = 0.002), fibrinogen (p = 0.001), and SAP in the first trimester (p = 0.003), the effect of obesity on GDM prevalence disappeared (PR = 1.395; 95%CI = 0.788–2.469, p = 0.253), while VDD maintained its significant association with GDM (PR = 1.660; 95%CI = 1.042–2.645; p = 0.033).
For construction of the adjusted model (AIC), a stepwise regression method was used, and variable selection was based on the Akaike Information Criterion. The presence of VDD was associated with a 1.6-fold increased risk of GDM (PR = 1.635; 95%CI = 1.027–2.604; p = 0.038) when adjusted by age (p = 0.003), triglycerides (p < 0.001), fibrinogen (p < 0.001), and SAP in the first trimester (p < 0.001).
This finding means that both VDD and obesity are associated with an increased prevalence for GDM, but once adjusted by other variables, only VDD retained its significant association with GDM.
3.3. Assessment of Secondary Obstetric and Neonatal Events: Association with VDD and BMI
Secondary obstetric and neonatal events were analyzed in relation to VDD and BMI (Table 3). In the case of VDD, there were no differences in event occurrence, apart from the increased percentage of GDM (12.3% vs. 7.1%; p = 0.012). With regard to BMI, GDM prevalence was much higher in the obese (26.1%) group, compared to the overweight (9.4%) and normal weight (7.7%) groups (p < 0.001). Overweight pregnant women presented a higher proportion of preterm births compared to normal weight and obese women, although this did not reach statistical significance. An increment in the frequency of births by cesarean section and newborns with a weight percentile >90 was observed as BMI increased. The proportion of cases with a head circumference percentile >90 was also higher but did not achieve statistical significance.
4. Discussion
Our results revealed that there was a high frequency of VDD in the pregnant women of our region (55.5%). In our daily work, between five and six pregnant women will present this condition. This finding is consistent with previously reported data [5,6].
The prevalence of GDM in our department is similar to the Spanish pregnant women’s population [16]. Roughly, 1 in 10 pregnancies receives this diagnosis, which becomes a relevant health problem.
In this study, we found that there were higher levels of VDD (68.2% vs. 54.1%) and obesity (32.2% vs 10.8%) in GDM pregnant women. In the multivariate analysis, we found a statistically significant PR of 1.635 for GDM when VDD was present. This association was not dependent on BMI. These outcomes are in line with recently reported results in the Taiwanese population, which revealed a nonlinear relationship between the 25(OH)D plasma levels and the risk of GDM [32]. The relationship between VDD and BMI and the potential effect of BMI has recently been explored in the Chinese population. A correlation has been described, being stronger in the overweight and obese groups [33].
As opposed to other studies [9,25], we did not detect VDD being associated with an increased frequency of secondary events, apart from GDM (12.3% vs. 7.1%). There were no differences in the frequencies of preterm birth, preeclampsia, and neonatal admission to ICU, or in the distribution of neonatal measurement percentiles. We ignored whether calcidiol supplementation in our VDD pregnant women could have influenced the incidence of these secondary events. Moreover, the observed frequencies of secondary events in our study were lower than those reported, except for GDM. Thus, there is a possibility that the differences were not detected.
However, we found differences in secondary events with regard to the BMI group. A nonsignificant higher frequency of preterm births was observed in the overweight group, but not in the obese group. These results differ from those of previous studies [34,35]. We propose that we did not find any association in obese women due to the small size of this subgroup and the low expected incidence. Both births by cesarean section and a neonatal weight percentile >90 were more prevalent in the obese group, but we did not detect any difference in neonatal ICU admissions as compared to the others [35].
The link between VDD and GDM enables us to focus on a population for which to take action. We suggest further longitudinal studies to establish any relation of causality. This could lead to intervention with vitamin D supplementation and a potential influence on GDM incidence, thereby potentially preventing future disorders such as diabetes mellitus and metabolic syndrome.
Some limitations should be recognized. First, due to the regional nature of this study, our results might not be generalizable. Additional studies are necessary to corroborate our findings in other locations around the world. Second, an important limitation of our investigation was its cross-sectional nature, which precluded a causality analysis. With this experimental design, the fact that GDM modifies 25(OH)D serum levels and all other data cannot be excluded. Another limitation could be the lockdown in Spain that started in March 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This special situation may have impacted the prevalence of VDD, since the major source of vitamin D for children and adults is exposure to natural sunlight. Thus, a major cause of VDD is inadequate exposure to sunlight [36]. The lockdown might have reduced sun exposure in the pregnant women population of our region. However, since this was not a variable in our study, it has not been analyzed. Finally, calcidiol supplementation in VDD participants, from the 26th week of pregnancy, could have biased the incidence of secondary maternal and neonatal events. Following national recommendation guidelines, it was considered unethical not to supplement with calcidiol, once a VDD pregnant woman had been identified. Nevertheless, it is uncertain if the administered doses achieved the normalization of the 25(OH)D serum concentration, as no further analyses were performed.
5. Conclusions
Our results revealed an association between VDD and GDM, which was independent of BMI. This relationship may indicate a possible influence of 25(OH)D in GDM development. However, further longitudinal studies are needed to establish causality.
VDD was not related to secondary events, in opposition to the BMI group, which showed a higher proportion of births by cesarean section and a neonatal weight percentile >90 in obesity.
Conceptualization, N.A.-D., M.J.G.-T. and E.C.-C.; methodology, N.A.-D., M.J.G.-T., V.G.-G. and J.A.Q.-R.; formal analysis, N.A.-D. and J.A.Q.-R.; investigation, N.A.-D., S.J., A.S. and J.B.; resources, V.G.-G. and A.P.-E.; data curation, N.A.-D. and J.A.Q.-R.; writing—original draft preparation, N.A.-D.; writing—review and editing, J.A.Q.-R., A.P.-E., V.G.-G. and E.C.-C.; supervision, M.J.G.-T. and V.G.-G.; funding acquisition, N.A.-D. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
This research was partially funded by Fundación Navarro Tripodi. The APC received no external funding.
This study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Review Board of Hospital General Universitario Elda (protocol code VITD and date of approval: 17 June 2019).
Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in this study.
Not applicable.
The authors thank all of the pregnant women included in this study. They acknowledge the doctors and midwives in the Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics in the Hospital General Universitario Elda, with special mention to the High-Risk Pregnancies Clinic personnel (Guadalupe Díaz-García). The authors also recognize the Laboratory Department for their collaboration. Finally, they appreciate the help of Eduardo Bernabeu and Antonio García-Valentín in the writing, editing, and reviewing of this manuscript.
The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analysis, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Enlarge this image.Figure 1. Individual vitamin D serum level distribution across the entire sample, in relation to BMI and GDM (the horizontal dotted line represents the threshold for VDD as <20 ng/dL, while the vertical dotted lines represent the limits of the BMI groups: Normal weight <25, overweight 25–30, and obesity >30).
Enlarge this image.Figure 2. Mean vitamin D serum levels in relation to BMI and grouped by the presence of GDM. Error bars represent the mean and 95% confidence intervals.
Participants’ characteristics in relation to gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM).
| Characteristics | Entire Sample | Non-GDM |
GDM |
p-Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sociodemographic characteristics | ||||
| Age (years), mean (SD) | 32.0 (5.8) | 31.7 (5.7) | 34.2 (5.7) | <0.001 * |
| Questionnaire (St. Carlos Study), n (%) | ||||
| Physical activity | −0.7 (1.4) | −0.7 (1.4) | −0.8 (1.3) | 0.942 |
| Nutritional status | 3.9 (3.7) | 3.8 (3.7) | 4.0 (3.6) | 0.813 |
| Lifestyle | 3.1 (4.2) | 3.2 (3.9) | 3.2 (3.9) | 0.758 |
| Maternal smoking habit, n (%) | 91 (10.3) | 79 (10.0) | 12 (12.9) | 0.377 |
| Maternal hypothyroidism, n (%) | 48 (5.4) | 40 (5.0) | 8 (8.6) | 0.152 |
| Ethnicity, n (%) | 0.045 * | |||
| Caucasian | 766 (86.7) | 692 (87.6) | 74 (80.6) | |
| South American | 62 (7.0) | 54 (6.8) | 8 (8.6) | |
| Other | 55 (6.2) | 44 (5.6) | 11 (11.8) | |
| Pregnancy-related characteristics | ||||
| SAP, first trimester (mmHg), mean (SD) | 110.8 (11.7) | 110.2 (11.5) | 116.4 (12.0) | <0.001 * |
| DAP, first trimester (mmHg), mean (SD) | 68.8 (8.8) | 68.3 (8.6) | 73.0 (9.7) | <0.001 * |
| VDD, n (%) | 489 (55.5) | 429 (54.1) | 60 (68.2) | 0.012 * |
| BMI, n (%) | 24.8 (4.8) | 24.5 (4.5) | 27.5 (5.9) | 0.021 * |
| BMI group, n (%) | <0.001 * | |||
| Normal (<25) | 532 (60.4) | 491 (62.3) | 41 (44.1) | |
| Overweight (25–30) | 234 (26.6) | 212 (26.9) | 22 (23.7) | |
| Obesity (>30) | 115 (13.0) | 85 (10.8) | 30 (32.2) | |
| Parity, n (%) | 0.464 | |||
| Primigravida | 446 (50.3) | 402 (50.7) | 44 (47.3) | |
| 2 pregnancies | 332 (37.5) | 298 (37.6) | 34 (36.6) | |
| ≥3 pregnancies | 108 (12.2) | 93 (11.7) | 15 (16.1) | |
| History of cesarean section, n (%) | 98 (11.1) | 85 (10.5) | 13 (14.0) | 0.345 |
| Gestational hypothyroidism, n (%) | 195 (22.0) | 175 (22.1) | 20 (21.5) | 0.901 |
| Blood test, mean (SD) | ||||
| Vitamin D (ng/dL) | 19.3 (8.9) | 19.5 (8.9) | 17.2 (8.6) | 0.021 * |
| C-reactive protein (mg/dL) | 5.7 (5.8) | 5.7 (6.0) | 6.2 (4.0) | 0.005 * |
| Ferritin (mg/dL) | 24.6 (25.5) | 24.3 (25.8) | 26.7 (21.7) | 0.249 |
| Cholesterol (mg/dL) | 224.3 (38.7) | 223.7 (38.8) | 229.5 (37.4) | 0.084 |
| HDL cholesterol (mg/dL) | 75.8 (15.3) | 76.3 (15.2) | 72.1 (15.7) | 0.034 * |
| LDL cholesterol (mg/dL) | 114.1 (32.5) | 113.5 (32.0) | 119.7 (36.1) | 0.197 |
| Triglycerides (mg/dL) | 177.2 (68.1) | 172.2 (62.4) | 220.5 (95.3) | <0.001 * |
| Fibrinogen (mg/dL) | 397.8 (56.3) | 394.5 (54.6) | 425.5 (62.3) | <0.001 * |
| Hemoglobin (g/dL) | 11.6 (0.9) | 11.6 (0.9) | 11.6 (0.8) | 0.747 |
| Hematocrit (%) | 34.2 (2.5) | 34.2 (2.5) | 34.2 (2.4) | 0.597 |
* p < 0.05. Abbreviations: GDM, gestational diabetes mellitus; VDD, vitamin D deficiency; SAP, systolic arterial pressure; DAP, diastolic arterial pressure; BMI, body mass index.
Association study. Prevalence ratio for GDM, estimated by Poisson regression models.
| Crude Model | Model 1 | Model 2 | Adjusted Model (AIC) | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PR | 95%CI | p-Value | PR | 95%CI | p-Value | PR | 95%CI | p-Value | PR | 95%CI | p-Value | ||
| VDD: | No | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| Yes | 1.718 | (1.119–2.637) | 0.013 * | 1.567 | (1.016–2.417) | 0.042 * | 1.660 | (1.042–2.645) | 0.033 * | 1.635 | (1.027–2.604) | 0.038 * | |
| BMI: | Normal | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||||||||
| Overweight | 1.220 | (0.744–2.001) | 0.431 | 1.137 | (0.680–1.899) | 0.625 | 0.724 | (0.404–1.299) | 0.279 | NS | |||
| Obesity | 3.385 | (2.212–5.181) | <0.001 * | 2.992 | (1.907–4.694) | <0.001 * | 1.395 | (0.788–2.469) | 0.253 | NS | |||
| Ethnicity: | Caucasian | 1 | - | ||||||||||
| South American | 1.336 | (0.675–2.642) | 0.406 | - | NS | NS | |||||||
| Other | 2.070 | (1.169–3.665) | 0.013 * | - | NS | NS | |||||||
| Parity: | Primigravida | 1 | - | ||||||||||
| 2 pregnancies | 1.038 | (0.679–1.587) | 0.863 | - | NS | NS | |||||||
| ≥3 pregnancies | 1.408 | (0.815–2.433) | 0.220 | - | NS | NS | |||||||
| Previous cesarean section | 1.305 | (0.755–2.256) | 0.340 | - | NS | NS | |||||||
| Gestational hypothyroidism | 0.971 | (0.608–1.551) | 0.901 | - | NS | NS | |||||||
| Age | 1.078 | (1.035–1.122) | <0.001 * | - | 1.062 | (1.020–1.104) | 0.003 * | 1.064 | (1.022–1.107) | 0.003 * | |||
| Triglycerides | 1.005 | (1.004–1.007) | <0.001 * | - | 1.003 | (1.001–1.005) | 0.002 * | 1.003 | (1.002–1.005) | <0.001 * | |||
| Fibrinogen | 1.008 | (1.005–1.011) | <0.001 * | - | 1.006 | (1.002–1.009) | 0.001 * | 1.005 | (1.002–1.009) | <0.001 * | |||
| SAP | 1.042 | (1.025–1.060) | <0.001 * | - | 1.027 | (1.009–1.045) | 0.003 * | 1.031 | (1.013–1.049) | <0.001 * | |||
| DAP | 1.055 | (1.032–1.079) | <0.001 * | - | NS | NS | |||||||
| CRP | 1.013 | (0.994–1.032) | 0.193 | - | NS | NS | |||||||
| Ferritin | 1.003 | (0.998–1.007) | 0.285 | - | NS | NS | |||||||
| Cholesterol | 1.003 | (0.999–1.008) | 0.160 | - | NS | NS | |||||||
| HDL | 0.984 | (0.970–0.997) | 0.019 * | - | NS | NS | |||||||
| LDL | 1.005 | (0.998–1.012) | 0.133 | - | NS | NS | |||||||
| Questionnaire: | Physical activity | 0.990 | (0.858–1.142) | 0.889 | - | NS | NS | ||||||
| Nutritional habit | 1.008 | (0.951–1.069) | 0.778 | - | NS | NS | |||||||
| Lifestyle | 1.005 | (0.958–1.055) | 0.827 | - | NS | NS | |||||||
| Hemoglobin | 1.046 | (0.837–1.308) | 0.692 | - | NS | NS | |||||||
| Hematocrit | 1.010 | (0.939–1.087) | 0.793 | - | NS | NS | |||||||
| Maternal smoking habit | 1.294 | (0.735–2.280) | 0.372 | - | NS | NS | |||||||
| Maternal hypothyroidism | 1.643 | (0.846–3.192) | 0.143 | - | NS | NS | |||||||
* p < 0.05. Abbreviations: PR, prevalence ratio; CI, confidence interval; NS, non-significant; BMI, body mass index; VDD, vitamin D deficiency; SAP, systolic arterial pressure; DAP, diastolic arterial pressure; CRP, C-reactive protein. Model 1: Fitted exclusively with VDD and BMI. Model 2: Further adjusted with age, triglycerides, fibrinogen, and SAP. Adjusted model: Constructed following a stepwise regression methodology based on the Akaike Information Criterion.
Secondary maternal and neonatal events: Associations with VDD and BMI.
| VDD | p-Value | BMI Group | p-Value | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No | Yes | Normal | Overweight | Obese | |||
| GDM | 28 (7.1) | 60 (12.3) | 0.012 * | 41 (7.7) | 22 (9.4) | 30 (26.1) | <0.001 * |
| Preterm birth | 23 (5.9) | 20 (4.1) | 0.224 | 23 (4.3) | 18 (7.7) | 2 (1.7) | 0.034 |
| Preeclampsia | 10 (2.6) | 13 (2.7) | 0.921 | 11 (2.1) | 6 (2.6) | 6 (5.2) | 0.158 |
| Cesarean section | 79 (20.3) | 90 (18.6) | 0.534 | 86 (16.3) | 52 (22.5) | 31 (27.4) | 0.009 * |
| Neonatal ICU admission | 79 (21.3) | 99 (21.2) | 0.961 | 106 (21.0) | 42 (18.8) | 32 (28.6) | 0.115 |
| Weight percentile | 0.054 | <0.001 * | |||||
| <10 | 35 (8.9) | 29 (5.9) | 44 (8.3) | 9 (3.8) | 10 (8.7) | ||
| 10–90 | 312 (79.6) | 377 (77.1) | 424 (79.7) | 188 (80.3) | 75 (65.2) | ||
| >90 | 30 (7.7) | 59 (12.1) | 39 (7.3) | 27 (11.5) | 25 (21.7) | ||
| Missing | 15 (3.8) | 24 (4.9) | 25 (4.7) | 10 (4.3) | 5 (4.3) | ||
| Height percentile | 0.068 | 0.078 | |||||
| <10 | 32 (8.2) | 21 (4.3) | 34 (6.4) | 10 (4.3) | 9 (7.8) | ||
| 10–90 | 272 (69.4) | 349 (71.4) | 386 (72.6) | 164 (70.1) | 69 (60.0) | ||
| >90 | 71 (18.1) | 88 (18.0) | 85 (16.0) | 44 (18.8) | 31 (27.0) | ||
| Missing | 17 (4.3) | 31 (6.3) | 27 (5.1) | 16 (6.8) | 6 (5.2) | ||
| Head circumference percentile | 0.465 | 0.039 | |||||
| <10 | 31 (7.9) | 43 (8.8) | 50 (9.4) | 12 (5.1) | 12 (10.4) | ||
| 10–90 | 322 (82.1) | 388 (79.3) | 431 (81.0) | 192 (82.1) | 84 (73.0) | ||
| >90 | 21 (5.4) | 24 (4.9) | 23 (4.3) | 12 (5.1) | 12 (10.4) | ||
| Missing | 18 (4.6) | 34 (7.0) | 28 (5.3) | 18 (7.7) | 7 (6.1) | ||
* p < 0.025. Abbreviations: GDM, gestational diabetes mellitus; VDD, vitamin D deficiency; ICU, intensive care unit.
References
1. Holick, M. Vitamin D Deficiency. N. Engl. J. Med.; 2007; 357, pp. 266-281. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra070553]
2. Palacios, C.; Gonzalez, L. Is Vitamin D Deficiency a Major Global Public Health?. J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol.; 2014; 144 Pt A, 138. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsbmb.2013.11.003]
3. Pilz, S.; März, W.; Cashman, K.D.; Kiely, M.E.; Whiting, S.J.; Holick, M.F.; Grant, W.B.; Pludowski, P.; Hiligsmann, M.; Trummer, C. et al. Rationale and Plan for Vitamin D Food Fortification: A Review and Guidance Paper. Front. Endocrinol.; 2018; 9, 373. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2018.00373] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30065699]
4. Hilger, J.; Friedel, A.; Herr, R.; Rausch, T.; Roos, F.; Wahl, D.A.; Pierroz, D.D.; Weber, P.; Hoffmann, K.; Hoffmann, D.K. Systematic Review a Systematic Review of Vitamin D Status in Populations Worldwide. Br. J. Nutr.; 2021; 111, pp. 23-45. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007114513001840]
5. Cashman, K.D.; Dowling, K.G.; Škrabáková, Z.; Gonzalez-Gross, M.; Valtueña, J.; de Henauw, S.; Moreno, L.; Damsgaard, C.T.; Michaelsen, K.F.; Mølgaard, C. et al. Vitamin D Deficiency in Europe: Pandemic?. Am. J. Clin. Nutr.; 2016; 103, 1033. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.115.120873] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26864360]
6. Quesada-Gómez, J.; Diaz-Curiel, M.; Sosa-Henriquez, M.; Malouf-Sierra, J.; Nogues-Solan, X.; Gomez-Alonso, C.; Rodriguez-Mañas, L.; Neyro-Bilbao, J.; Cortes, X.; Delgadillo, J. Low Calcium Intake and Inadequate Vitamin D Status in Postmenopausal Osteoporotic Women. J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol.; 2013; 136, pp. 175-177. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsbmb.2012.10.013] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23142144]
7. Mata-Granados, J.; Luque de Castro, M.; Quesada Gomez, J. Inappropriate Serum Levels of Retinol, Alpha-Tocopherol, 25 Hydroxyvitamin D3 and 24,25 Dihydroxyvitamin D3 Levels in Healthy Spanish Adults: Simultaneous Assessment by HPLC. Clin. Biochem.; 2008; 41, pp. 676-680. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2008.02.003]
8. Saraf, R.; Morton, S.; Camargo, C.; Grant, C. Global Summary of Maternal and Newborn Vitamin D Status—A Systematic Review. Matern. Child Nutr.; 2016; 12, pp. 647-668. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/mcn.12210]
9. Palacios, C.; Kostiuk, L.K.; Peña-Rosas, J.P. Vitamin D Supplementation for Women during Pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev.; 2019; 7, CD008873. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008873.pub4]
10. Zhang, Y.; Gong, Y.; Xue, H.; Xiong, J.; Cheng, G. Vitamin D and Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review Based on Data Free of Hawthorne Effect. BJOG Int. J. Obstet. Gynaecol.; 2018; 125, pp. 784-793. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.15060] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29244241]
11. Urrutia, R.; Thorp, J. Vitamin D in Pregnancy: Current Concepts. Curr. Opin. Obstet. Gynecol.; 2012; 24, pp. 57-64. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GCO.0b013e3283505ab3] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22327734]
12. Bellamy, L.; Casas, J.; Hingorani, A.; Williams, D. Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus after Gestational Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Lancet Lond. Engl.; 2009; 373, pp. 1773-1779. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60731-5]
13. Nikooyeh, B.; Neyestani, T. Oxidative Stress, Type 2 Diabetes and Vitamin D: Past, Present and Future. Diabetes Metab. Res. Rev.; 2016; 32, pp. 260-267. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/dmrr.2718]
14. Wimalawansa, S. Associations of Vitamin D with Insulin Resistance, Obesity, Type 2 Diabetes, and Metabolic Syndrome. J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol.; 2018; 175, pp. 177-189. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsbmb.2016.09.017] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27662816]
15. Srikanthan, K.; Feyh, A.; Visweshwar, H.; Shapiro, J.; Sodhi, K. Systematic Review of Metabolic Syndrome Biomarkers: A Panel for Early Detection, Management, and Risk Stratification in the West Virginian Population. Int. J. Med Sci.; 2016; 13, pp. 25-38. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.7150/ijms.13800] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26816492]
16. Ben-Haroush, A.; Yogev, Y.; Hod, M. Epidemiology of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus and Its Association with Type 2 Diabetes. Diabet. Med. A J. Br. Diabet. Assoc.; 2004; 21, pp. 103-113. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1464-5491.2003.00985.x]
17. Yang, Z.; Phung, H.; Freebairn, L.; Sexton, R.; Raulli, A.; Kelly, P. Contribution of Maternal Overweight and Obesity to the Occurrence of Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes. Aust. N. Z. J. Obstet. Gynaecol.; 2019; 59, pp. 367-374. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ajo.12866] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30024043]
18. Emmen, J.M.A.; Wielders, J.P.M.; Boer, A.K.; van den Ouweland, J.M.W.; Vader, H.L. The New Roche Vitamin D Total Assay: Fit for Its Purpose?. Clin. Chem. Lab. Med.; 2012; 50, pp. 1969-1972. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2011-0085] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23113978]
19. Leino, A.; Turpeinen, U.; Koskinen, P. Automated Measurement of 25-OH Vitamin D3 on the Roche Modular E170 Analyzer. Clin. Chem.; 2008; 54, pp. 2059-2062. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2008.111732] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18927245]
20. Knudsen, C.S.; Nexo, E.; Højskov, C.S.; Heickendorff, L. Analytical Validation of the Roche 25-OH Vitamin D Total Assay. Clin. Chem. Lab. Med.; 2012; 50, pp. 1965-1968. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2011-0964] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23093282]
21. Iglesias Álvarez, E.M.; Granada Ybern, M.L.; Doladé Botías, M.; Barallat Martínez de Osaba, J.; Hidalgo Sáez, I.; Cruz Pastor Ferrer, M. Comparación de Las Concentraciones de Vitamina D Por 3 Métodos Comerciales. Rev. Lab. Clínico; 2013; 6, pp. 2-9. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.labcli.2012.05.003]
22. VDSCP List of Certified Participants | CDC. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/labstandards/vdscp_participants.html (accessed on 22 November 2021).
23. Gómez de Tejada Romero, M.; Sosa Henríquez, M.; del Pino Montes, J.; Jodar Gimeno, E.; Quesada Gómez, J.; Cancelo Hidalgo, M.; Díaz Curiel, M.; Mesa Ramos, M.; Muñoz Torres, M.; Carpintero Benítez, P. et al. Documento de Posición Sobre Las Necesidades y Niveles Óptimos de Vitamina D Sociedad Española de Investigación Ósea y Del Metabolismo Mineral (SEIOMM) y Sociedades Afines. Rev. Osteoporos. Y Metab. Miner.; 2011; 3, pp. 53-64.
24. Carpenter, M.; Coustan, D. Criteria for Screening Tests for Gestational Diabetes. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol.; 1982; 144, pp. 768-773. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0002-9378(82)90349-0]
25. Metzger, B.; Coustan, D. Summary and Recommendations of the Fourth International Workshop-Conference on Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. The Organizing Committee. Diabetes Care; 1998; 21, (Suppl. 2), pp. B161-B167. [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9704245]
26. Bloomgarden, Z. American Diabetes Association 60th Scientific Sessions, 2000: Diabetes and Pregnancy. Diabetes Care; 2000; 23, pp. 1699-1702. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2337/diacare.23.11.1699] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11092295]
27. Corcoy, R.; Lumbreras, B.; Bartha, J.L.; Ricart, W. Embarazo Nuevos Criterios Diagnósticos de Diabetes Mellitus Gestacional a Partir Del Estudio HAPO. ¿Son Válidos En Nuestro Medio?. Av. Diabetol.; 2010; 26, pp. 139-142. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1134-3230(10)63001-3]
28. World Health Organization. WHO Consultation on Obesity (1999: Geneva, Switzerland). Obesity: Preventing and Managing the Global Epidemic; Report of a WHO Consultation World Health Organization Technical Report Series WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2000; Volume 894.
29. The Diabetes and Nutrition Study Group of the Spanish Diabetes Association. Diabetes Nutrition and Complications Trial. Diabetes Care; 2004; 27, pp. 984-987. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2337/diacare.27.4.984] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15047660]
30. Durán, A.; Martín, P.; Runkle, I.; Pérez, N.; Abad, R.; Fernández, M.; del Valle, L.; Sanz, M.; Calle-Pascual, A. Benefits of Self-Monitoring Blood Glucose in the Management of New-Onset Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: The St Carlos Study, a Prospective Randomized Clinic-Based Interventional Study with Parallel Groups. J. Diabetes; 2010; 2, pp. 203-211. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-0407.2010.00081.x] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20923485]
31. R: The R Project for Statistical Computing. Available online: https://www.r-project.org/ (accessed on 1 November 2021).
32. Pham, T.T.M.; Huang, Y.-L.; Chao, J.C.-J.; Chang, J.-S.; Chen, Y.-C.; Wang, F.-F.; Bai, C.-H. Plasma 25(OH)D Concentrations and Gestational Diabetes Mellitus among Pregnant Women in Taiwan. Nutrients; 2021; 13, 2538. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nu13082538] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34444700]
33. Shao, B.; Mo, M.; Xin, X.; Jiang, W.; Wu, J.; Huang, M.; Wang, S.; Muyiduli, X.; Si, S.; Shen, Y. et al. The Interaction between Prepregnancy BMI and Gestational Vitamin D Deficiency on the Risk of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Subtypes with Elevated Fasting Blood Glucose. Clin. Nutr. Edinb. Scotl.; 2020; 39, pp. 2265-2273. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2019.10.015] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31669001]
34. Liu, B.; Xu, G.; Sun, Y.; Du, Y.; Gao, R.; Snetselaar, L.G.; Santillan, M.K.; Bao, W. Association between Maternal Pre-Pregnancy Obesity and Preterm Birth According to Maternal Age and Race or Ethnicity: A Population-Based Study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol.; 2019; 7, pp. 707-714. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2213-8587(19)30193-7]
35. Liu, P.; Xu, L.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Du, Y.; Sun, Y.; Wang, Z. Association between Perinatal Outcomes and Maternal Pre-Pregnancy Body Mass Index. Obes Rev.; 2016; 17, pp. 1091-1102. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/obr.12455]
36. Nair, R.; Maseeh, A. Vitamin D: The “sunshine” vitamin. J. Pharmacol. Pharmacother.; 2012; 3, pp. 118-126. [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22629085]
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Details
; Pereira-Expósito, Avelino 4
; Gil-Guillén, Vicente 5 ; Cortés-Castell, Ernesto 6
; García-Teruel, María J 1 1 Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Hospital General Universitario Elda, 03600 Elda, Spain;
2 Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Hospital General Universitario Elda, 03600 Elda, Spain;
3 Department of Clinical Medicine, Miguel Hernández University, 03550 San Juan, Spain;
4 Research Unit, Hospital General Universitario Elda, 03600 Elda, Spain;
5 Department of Clinical Medicine, Miguel Hernández University, 03550 San Juan, Spain;
6 Department of Pharmacology, Pediatrics and Organic Chemistry, Miguel Hernández University, 03550 San Juan, Spain;