4.7 Article

Sex-specific programming of cardiovascular physiology in children

期刊

EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL
卷 29, 期 17, 页码 2164-2170

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehn292

关键词

foetal programming; epidemiology; paediatrics; physiology; stress

资金

  1. NICHD [1 R01 HD41107-01]
  2. WellBeing and the Medical Research Council
  3. Medical Research Council [U1475000001, MC_U147585827] Funding Source: researchfish
  4. MRC [MC_U147585827] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims Increasing evidence suggests that adverse prenatal environments, as indicated by low birth weight, cause long-term changes in cardiovascular physiology that predispose to circulatory disease. The mechanisms are poorly understood, most human studies have been carried out in adults and little is known about early pathophysiological changes. Therefore, we have assessed the relationship between birth weight and cardiovascular physiology in children. Methods and results In 140 healthy boys and girls (aged 7-9 years), born at term and followed prospectively, we continuously recorded blood pressure, electrocardiograms and cardiac impedance before, during, and after 10 min of psychosocial stress (Trier Social Stress Test for Children). In boys, an association of lower birth weight with higher resting systemic arterial pressure (beta = -6.8 mmHg/kg, P = 0.03) and a trend towards higher vascular resistance (beta = -87 dyne s/cm(5)/kg, ns) were substantially strengthened following stress (beta= -9.5 mmHg/kg, P = 0.003 and beta = -139 dyne s/cm(5)/kg, P = 0.02, respectively). In girls, lower birth weight was associated with a shorter pre-ejection period (beta = 8.0 ms/kg, P = 0.005) and corrected QT interval (beta = 11.9 ms/kg, P = 0.003) at rest and little changed by stress. Conclusion Smaller size at birth is associated with sex-specific alterations in cardiac physiology; boys had higher systemic vascular resistance and girls had increased cardiac sympathetic activation.

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

4.7
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