4.4 Review

Maternal and gestational influences on childhood blood pressure

期刊

PEDIATRIC NEPHROLOGY
卷 35, 期 8, 页码 1409-1418

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00467-019-4201-x

关键词

Childhood; Blood pressure; Gestational hypertension; Gestational diabetes; Preeclampsia; Maternal diabetes; Maternal obesity; Fetal programing; Prematurity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Exposures that contribute to a sub-optimal intrauterine environment can have an effect on the developing fetus. Impaired fetal growth that results in low birth weight is an established risk factor for cardio-metabolic disorders later in life. Recent epidemiologic and prospective cohort studies that include the maternal and gestational period have identified maternal and gestational conditions that confer increased risk for subsequent cardio-metabolic disorders in the absence of low birth weight. Maternal pre-conception health status, including chronic obesity and type 2 diabetes, increase risk for childhood obesity and obesity-related higher blood pressure (BP) in child offspring. Maternal gestational exposures, including gestational diabetes, gestational hypertension, and preeclampsia, are associated with higher BP in offspring. Other maternal exposures such as cigarette smoke and air pollution also increase risk for higher BP in child offspring. Recent, but limited, data indicate that assisted reproductive technologies can be associated with hypertension in childhood, despite otherwise normal gestation and healthy newborn. Gestational exposures associated with higher BP in childhood can be related to familial lifestyle factors, genetics, or epigenetic modification of fetal deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). These factors, or combination of factors, as well as other adverse intrauterine conditions, could induce fetal programing leading to health consequences in later life. Current and developing research will provide additional insights on gestational exposures and fetal adjustments that increase risk for higher BP levels in childhood.

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

4.4
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