Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T21:33:52.792Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The association of maternal characteristics and macronutrient intake in pregnancy with neonatal body composition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 September 2014

M. K. Horan
Affiliation:
University College Dublin Obstetrics and Gynaecology, School of Medicine and Medical Science, University College Dublin, National Maternity Hospital, Dublin 2, Republic of Ireland
C. A. McGowan
Affiliation:
University College Dublin Obstetrics and Gynaecology, School of Medicine and Medical Science, University College Dublin, National Maternity Hospital, Dublin 2, Republic of Ireland
E. R. Gibney
Affiliation:
University College Dublin School of Agriculture & Food Science, Science Centre South, Belfield, Dublin 4, Republic of Ireland
J. M. Donnelly
Affiliation:
University College Dublin Obstetrics and Gynaecology, School of Medicine and Medical Science, University College Dublin, National Maternity Hospital, Dublin 2, Republic of Ireland
J. Byrne
Affiliation:
University College Dublin Obstetrics and Gynaecology, School of Medicine and Medical Science, University College Dublin, National Maternity Hospital, Dublin 2, Republic of Ireland
F. M. McAuliffe
Affiliation:
University College Dublin Obstetrics and Gynaecology, School of Medicine and Medical Science, University College Dublin, National Maternity Hospital, Dublin 2, Republic of Ireland
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Type
Abstract
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2014 

The in utero environment is known to affect fetal development from cognitive development to development of the fetal organs to growth and fat deposition( Reference McGowan and McAuliffe 1 , Reference Wu, Bazer and Cudd 2 ) however many of the mechanisms by which this occurs remain unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the association between maternal dietary macronutrient intake and lifestyle throughout pregnancy and neonatal body composition.

This was an analysis of 542 mother and infant pairs from the ROLO study (Randomised cOntrol trial of LOw glycaemic index diet versus no dietary intervention to prevent recurrence of fetalmacrosomia). Food diaries as well as food frequency and lifestyle and physical activity questionnaires were completed during pregnancy. Maternal anthropometry was measured throughout pregnancy and neonatal anthropometry was measured at birth.

Multiple linear regression analysis revealed the main maternal factor associated with increased birth weight was greater gestational weight gain R2 adj 23·3%(F = 11·547, p < 0·001). The main maternal factor associated with increased birth length was non-smoking status R2 adj 27·8%(F = 6·193, p < 0·001). Neonatal central adiposity (determined using waist:height ratio) was negatively associated with maternal age and positively associated with the following parameters: smoking status, maternal pre-pregnancy arm circumference, percentage energy from saturated fat in late pregnancy, postprandial glucose at 28 weeks gestation and membership of the control group with a positive trend towards association with trimester 2 glycaemic load R2 adj 38·1%(F = 8·000, p < 0·001).

In conclusion, several maternal diet and lifestyle factors were associated with neonatal body composition. Low glycaemic index dietary intervention in pregnancy was found to have a beneficial effect on neonatal central adiposity. Additionally, central adiposity was positively associated with maternal dietary fat intake and postprandial glucose highlighting the important role of healthy diet in pregnancy in promoting normal neonatal adiposity.

This work was supported by the Health Research Board Ireland, the Health Research Centre for Diet, Nutrition and Diabetes Ireland, the National Maternity Hospital Medical Fund and the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007–2013), project EarlyNutrition.

References

1. McGowan, CA & McAuliffe, FM (2010) Br J Nutr 104, 153159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Wu, G, Bazer, FW, Cudd, TA et al. (2004) J Nutr 134, 21692172.Google Scholar