Continuous Glucose Monitoring Reduces Risk of Large Babies in Gestational Diabetes, Landmark Study Finds
A new study reveals that continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) substantially lowers the risk of delivering a larger-than-average baby for women with gestational diabetes, offering a promising advancement in prenatal care. Published December 4, 2025, in The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology, the research demonstrates the benefits of real-time glucose tracking over customary finger-prick blood sugar testing.
Did you know? – The study found that only 4% of women using continuous glucose monitoring delivered large-for-gestational-age babies, compared to 10% in the traditional finger-prick group. This highlights CGM’s potential to improve outcomes for both mother and child.
An international team of researchers, led by the Medical University of Vienna, conducted a rigorous study involving 375 women diagnosed with gestational diabetes at four leading university hospitals: the University Hospital AKH Vienna, the Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, the University Hospital Jena, and the University Hospital Basel. Participants were divided into two groups – one utilizing real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rt-CGM) and the othre employing self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) via traditional finger pricks. Both groups received care adhering to established clinical guidelines throughout their pregnancies.
Pro tip: – Continuous glucose monitoring allows for real-time tracking of blood sugar levels. This enables adjustments to lifestyle or insulin therapy, which can positively impact pregnancy. It offers a more proactive approach to managing gestational diabetes.
Gestational diabetes, if left unmanaged, can lead to excessive fetal growth, increasing the likelihood of birth complications and potentially predisposing children to obesity and metabolic disorders later in life. Early diagnosis and consistent treatment are crucial for mitigating these risks. The study’s findings offer a new avenue for more targeted and effective management of the condition.
the data revealed a substantial difference in outcomes between the two groups. Only 4% of women in the rt-CGM group delivered a large for gestational age (LGA) baby, compared to 10% in the SMBG group.Moreover, average birth weight percentiles were lower in the rt-CGM group, suggesting a reduced tendency toward excessive fetal growth and a greater likelihood of babies falling within the expected weight range.
Reader question: – Does stricter blood sugar control always benefit the baby? The study observed a higher incidence of small-for-gestational-age births in both groups. Researchers are investigating whether overly strict control might negatively influence fetal growth, requiring further study.
“Continuous glucose measurement via a sensor located under the skin allows patients to access their sugar levels at any time,” explained a study leader from the University Clinic for Gynecology at MedUni vienna/Vienna General Hospital. “This allows lifestyle or insulin therapy to be specifically adjusted, which can have a positive impact on the course of pregnancy.”
However, researchers also noted an observation requiring further examination: both study groups exhibited a higher incidence of newborns with small for gestational age (SGA) births. This suggests that overly strict blood sugar control might potentially influence fetal growth negatively, a nuance the researchers are keen to explore.
“In any case, our results suggest that real-time glucose measurement systems can improve pregnancy care – especially for women who benefit from more intensive therapy,” emphasized the lead author, also from the University Clinic for Gynecology at MedUni vienna/Vienna General Hospital. “Simultaneously occurring,the optimal blood glucose target values still need to be precisely defined to avoid both overgrowth and undergrowth of the fetus.”
The study, titled “Glycaemic control and pregnancy outcomes with real-time continuous glucose monitoring in gestational diabetes (GRACE): an open-label, multicentre, multinational, randomised controlled trial,” is available in full at Related
