4.5 Article

Pre-pregnancy BMI, gestational weight gain and risk of preeclampsia: a birth cohort study in Lanzhou, China

期刊

BMC PREGNANCY AND CHILDBIRTH
卷 17, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/s12884-017-1567-2

关键词

Pre-pregnancy BMI; Gestational weight gain; Preeclampsia; China; Birth cohort

资金

  1. Gansu Provincial Maternity and Child Care Hospital
  2. Gansu Provincial Science and Technology Department Grant [1204WCGA021]
  3. National Institutes of Health [K02HD70324, R01ES016317, R01ES019587]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: To evaluate the independent and joint effects of maternal pre-pregnancy BMI and gestational weight gain (GWG) on the risk of preeclampsia and its subtypes. Methods: A birth cohort study was conducted from 2010 to 2012 in Lanzhou, China. Three hundred fourty seven pregnant women with preeclampsia and 9516 normotensive women at Gansu Provincial Maternity and Child Care Hospital were included in the present study. Unconditional logistic regression models were used to evaluate the associations between pre-pregnancy BMI, GWG, and risk of preeclampsia and its subtypes. Results: Compared to women with normal pre-pregnancy BMI, those who were overweight/obese had an increased risk of preeclampsia (OR = 1.81; 95% CI: 1.37-2.39). Women with excessive GWG had an increased risk of preeclampsia (OR = 2.28; 95% CI: 1.70-3.05) compared to women with adequate GWG. The observed increased risk was similar for mild-, severe- and late-onset preeclampsia. No association was found for early-onset preeclampsia. Overweight/obese women with excessive GWG had the highest risk of developing preeclampsia compared to normal weight women with no excessive weight gain (OR = 3.78; 95% CI: 2.65-5.41). Conclusions: Our results suggested that pre-pregnancy BMI and GWG are independent risk factors for preeclampsia and that the risk might vary by preeclampsia subtypes. Our study also proposed a potential synergistic effect of pre-pregnancy BMI and GWG that warrants further investigation.

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

4.5
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