Search

Background: Inflammation during pregnancy may aggravate iron deficiency (ID) by increasing serum hepcidin and reducing iron absorption. This could restrict iron transfer to the fetus, increasing risk of infant ID and its adverse effects., Objectives: We aimed to assess whether iron bioavailability and/or iron transfer to the fetus is impaired in overweight/obese (OW) pregnant women with adiposity-related inflammation, compared with normal-weight (NW) pregnant women., Methods: In this prospective study, we followed NW (n = 43) and OW (n = 40) pregnant women who were receiving iron supplements from the 14th week of gestation to term and followed their infants to age 6 mo. We administered 57Fe and 58Fe in test meals mid-second and mid-third trimester, and measured tracer kinetics throughout pregnancy and infancy., Results: In total, 38 NW and 36 OW women completed the study to pregnancy week 36, whereas 30 NW and 27 OW mother-infant pairs completed the study to 6 mo postpartum. Both groups had comparable iron status, hemoglobin, and serum hepcidin throughout pregnancy. Compared with the NW, the OW pregnant women had 1) 43% lower fractional iron absorption (FIA) in the third trimester (P = 0.033) with median [IQR] FIA of 23.9% [11.4%-35.7%] and 13.5% [10.8%-19.5%], respectively; and 2) 17% lower maternal-fetal iron transfer from the first tracer (P = 0.051) with median [IQR] maternal-fetal iron transfer of 4.8% [4.2%-5.4%] and 4.0% [3.6%-4.6%], respectively. Compared with the infants born to NW women, infants born to OW women had lower body iron stores (BIS) with median [IQR] 7.7 [6.3-8.8] and 6.6 [4.6-9.2] mg/kg body weight at age 6 mo, respectively (P = 0.024). Prepregnancy BMI was a negative predictor of maternal-fetal iron transfer (β = -0.339, SE = 0.144, P = 0.025) and infant BIS (β = -0.237, SE = 0.026, P = 0.001)., Conclusions: Compared with NW, OW pregnant women failed to upregulate iron absorption in late pregnancy, transferred less iron to their fetus, and their infants had lower BIS. These impairments were associated with inflammation independently of serum hepcidin.This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02747316., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society for Nutrition.)

Background: The purpose of this study was to compare the reliability and reproducibility of the traditional qualitative method of assessing uterine cervical stiffness with those of a quantitative method using a novel device based on the aspiration technique., Methods: Five silicone models of the uterine cervix were created and used to simulate different cervical stiffnesses throughout gestation. The stiffness of the five cervix models was assessed both by digital palpation (firm, medium and soft) and with the Pregnolia System. Five self-trained participants conducted the device-based assessment, whereas 63 obstetricians and midwives, trained in digital palpation, conducted the cervical palpation., Results: The results of the two methods were analyzed in terms of inter-and intra-observer variability. For digital palpation, there was no common agreement on the assessment of the stiffness, except for the softest cervix. When assessing the same cervix model for a second time, 76% of the obstetricians and midwives disagreed with their previous assessment. In contrast, the maximum standard deviation for the device-based stiffness assessment for intra- and inter-observer variability was 3% and 3.4%, respectively., Conclusions: This study has shown that a device based on the aspiration technique provides obstetricians and midwives with a method for objectively and repeatably assess uterine cervical stiffness, which can eliminate the need to rely solely on a subjective interpretation, as is the case with digital palpation.

Objective: Nonadherence with scheduled saliva sampling, as encountered in ambulatory settings, can bias the estimation of salivary cortisol concentrations. This study is the first to estimate if such nonadherence is also associated with biased salivary testosterone concentration estimates., Methods: Using a standard ambulatory saliva-sampling protocol, we instructed pregnant women to collect saliva samples on two consecutive days at awakening, 1100h, 1500h, 2000h, and 2200h. We estimated testosterone concentrations in the saliva samples and participants' actual sampling times with an electronic medication event-monitoring system. We classified a saliva sample as adherent if it was sampled within a specific time window relative to its scheduled sampling time. We used a mixed-model analysis to distinguish between trait (number of adherent saliva samples per participant) and state (adherence status of a specific sample) adherence., Results: We included 60 pregnant women in this study. Seventy-five percent (448 of 600) of the scheduled samples indicated adherence with the sampling schedule. Participants' trait adherence was associated with their diurnal profiles of salivary testosterone estimates; that is, adherent participants had higher salivary testosterone estimates compared with nonadherent participants, F(1,58)=5.41, p=0.023, Cohen's d=0.67. The state adherence of a sample was associated with the salivary testosterone estimate of the related sample, F(1,469)=4.48, p=0.035, Cohen's d=0.20, with delayed sampling associated with lower salivary testosterone estimates., Conclusions: The results suggest that common ambulatory nonadherence with scheduled saliva sampling is associated with biased salivary testosterone estimates. They will inform further studies estimating salivary testosterone with ambulatory saliva-sampling designs and highlight the relevance of strategies to improve or confirm adherence, beyond routinely used instructions., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)