4.7 Article

Blood pressure in late adolescence and very low birth weight

Journal

PEDIATRICS
Volume 111, Issue 2, Pages 252-257

Publisher

AMER ACAD PEDIATRICS
DOI: 10.1542/peds.111.2.252

Keywords

very low birth weight; ambulatory blood pressure; hypertension; growth restriction in utero

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives. To determine whether blood pressure (BP) differed between very low birth weight (VLBW; birth weight less than or equal to 1500 g) subjects and normal birth weight (NBW; birth weight >2499 g) subjects in late adolescence, and to determine whether growth restriction in utero was related to BP in VLBW survivors at this age. Methods. This was a cohort study of 210 preterm survivors with birth weights <1501 g born from January 1, 1977, to March 31, 1982, and 60 randomly selected NBW subjects from the Royal Women's Hospital, Melbourne. BP was measured at 18+ years of age in 156 (74%) VLBW subjects and 38 (63%) NBW subjects with both a standard mercury sphygmomanometer and an ambulatory BP monitor. Results. VLBW subjects had higher sphygmomanometer systolic and diastolic BPs than NBW subjects (mm Hg; mean difference [95% confidence interval]; systolic, 8.6 [3.4, 13.9]; diastolic, 4.3 [1.0, 7.6]). VLBW subjects also had significantly higher mean systolic ambulatory BPs (mm Hg; mean difference [95% confidence interval]) for the 24-hour period (4.7 [1.4, 8.0]), and for both the awake (5.0 [1.6, 8.5]) and asleep (3.6 [0.04, 7.1]) periods. There were no significant differences between the birth weight groups for any ambulatory diastolic BPs. Within the VLBW subjects, there was no significant relationship between birth weight standard deviation score and any measure of BP. Conclusions. BP was significantly higher in late adolescence in VLBW survivors than in NBW subjects. Growth restriction in utero was not significantly related to BP in VLBW survivors.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available