4.4 Article

Gestational diabetes status and dietary intake modify maternal and cord blood allostatic load markers

期刊

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bmjdrc-2020-001468

关键词

diabetes; gestational; diet; nutrients

资金

  1. Interdisciplinary Research Grant of the City University of New York
  2. American Egg Board/Egg Nutrition Center

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction Allostatic load (AL) defines cardiometabolic, inflammatory, and neuroendocrine changes in the body in response to internal and external stressors. It is largely unknown whether gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) alters maternal and fetal AL, which in turn affects GDM outcomes. Whether dietary intakes and quality can modify AL and thus influence GDM progression is also unknown. Research design and methods In this study, we recruited 35 GDM and 30 non-GDM women in gestational week 25-33. Fasting blood samples were collected at enrollment, and cord venous blood samples were collected at delivery for the measurement of a series of AL biomarkers to calculate the composite AL index. Three-day dietary recalls were conducted at enrollment. Results Results suggest that GDM women had 60% higher composite AL index scores (p value=0.01). Maternal AL index was associated with shorter duration of gestation (beta=-0.33, p value=0.047) and higher fetal AL index (beta=0.47, p value=0.006) after adjusting for GDM status. Dietary intake of monounsaturated fatty acids was negatively associated with maternal AL index (beta=-0.20, p value=0.006). GDM women had lower total caloric intake and dietary glycemic load, yet their linolenic acid, vitamin C and E intakes were also decreased (all p value<0.05). These dietary differences were not related to birth outcomes measured. Conclusions In this study, GDM status and dietary intakes modify AL in this population. AL may serve as an indicator of GDM control. Future research on dietary interventions that can improve maternal AL markers during GDM is warranted.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据