Thanks for the replies guys. I knew the placenta deteriorated quicker, but didn't know that this could not be monitored. In that context then an induction does seem wise. I wonder why the risk of placenta deterioration and increased risk of still birth? I'd very much like to see the research behind these (and many other) statements. I wonder if it is based on older research from when the tools available to control diabetes were a bit more crude.
Thanks for the replies guys. I knew the placenta deteriorated quicker, but didn't know that this could not be monitored. In that context then an induction does seem wise. I wonder why the risk of placenta deterioration and increased risk of still birth? I'd very much like to see the research behind these (and many other) statements. I wonder if it is based on older research from when the tools available to control diabetes were a bit more crude.
<snip>
I don't know what study you're referring to, but yes, I was told that the placental deterioration risk was unrelated to HbA1C too. My HbA1C was excellent (28 ie 4.7) but I went for induction for that reason.
As I said, I can't quote the details of the study as it is yet to be published.
I am just mentioning it because the suggestion was raised that all the studies relating to risks during pregnancy were "old".
Hopefully something will be published fairly soon. I have no knowledge of any specific publication date.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?