4.2 Article

Antioxidant supplementation in pregnant women with low antioxidant status

期刊

JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY RESEARCH
卷 38, 期 9, 页码 1152-1161

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1447-0756.2012.01855.x

关键词

antioxidant supplementation; low-antioxidant status; pre-eclampsia

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Science, Sport and Culture of Japan [23592417, 21591422]
  2. Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan [20C-1, 09158522]
  3. JAOG Ogyaa Donation Foundation (JODF)
  4. Takeda Science Foundation
  5. Harris Birthright Research Centre for Fetal Medicine
  6. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [21591422, 23592417] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate the benefit of antioxidant supplementation in a cohort of women with low antioxidant status and determine the changes in cell-free mRNA. Material and Methods: This study was a randomized, placebo-controlled trial of 812 weeks' pregnant women who had low antioxidant status treated with either antioxidants or control diets daily until 2 weeks' postpartum. The primary end-point was the risk of pre-eclampsia and the secondary end-point was the changes of angiogenic and anti-oxidant mRNA markers related to the outcome (ClinicalTrial.gov, number NCT01232205). Results: There were 110 women enrolled in the study, randomly assigned to the supplementation (n = 52) and control group (n = 58). The overall rate of pre-eclampsia was 8.7% (nine subjects). There were significant differences (P = 0.034) between the supplementation and control group in the incidence of pre-eclampsia (2.0% [one case] and 14.5% [eight cases], respectively) and mRNA level of superoxide-dismutase, heme oxygenase-1, vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-1, endoglin and placental growth factor after supplementation. Conclusion: Supplementation of women with low antioxidant status with micronutrients containing antioxidants during early gestation might reduce the risk of pre-eclampsia.

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

4.2
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