4.3 Article

Characterization of fetal monocytes in preeclampsia and fetal growth restriction

Journal

JOURNAL OF PERINATAL MEDICINE
Volume 47, Issue 4, Pages 434-438

Publisher

WALTER DE GRUYTER GMBH
DOI: 10.1515/jpm-2018-0286

Keywords

fetal growth restriction; monocyte subsets; preeclampsia; pregnancy

Funding

  1. Ella Macnight Research Scholarship
  2. Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (RANZCOG) Research Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: There is little available data on fetal monocyte phenotype and function. A prospective cross-sectional pilot study was conducted to describe the cord blood monocyte subset phenotype in preeclampsia (PE) and fetal growth restriction (FGR) as compared to normal pregnancy and maternal circulation. Methods: Maternal and cord blood samples from 27 pregnancies were collected at delivery from normal pregnancy, PE, FGR and PE+ FGR. The distribution of fetal monocyte subtypes was characterized by CD14 and CD16 expression using flow cytometry and compared for each clinical group using a classification of classical, intermediate and non-classical subsets. Results: The intermediate monocytes were the dominant monocyte subset in the cord blood of PE and PE+ FGR with an increase in the combined inflammatory monocyte subsets intermediate and non-classical in PE compared to normal pregnancy. The non-classical monocyte subset proportion was elevated in all pathological groups PE, FGR and PE + FGR. A significant reduction in the non-classical monocyte subset was observed in the cord blood of the normal pregnancy group as compared to the maternal circulation. Conclusion: This study describes for the first time in the fetal circulation, dominant monocyte intermediate subsets and increased inflammatory subsets in PE as well as increased non-classical subsets in PE and FGR compared to normal pregnancy.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available