Back

Integrating multiple lines of evidence to assess the effects of maternal BMI on pregnancy and perinatal outcomes in up to 497,932 women

Borges, M. C.; Clayton, G.; Freathy, R.; Felix, J. F.; Fernandez-Sanles, A.; Soares, A. G.; Kilpi, F.; Yang, Q.; McEachan, R. R.; Richmond, R.; Liu, X.; Skotte, L.; Irizar, A.; Hattersley, A.; Bodinier, B.; Scholtens, D. M.; Nohr, E. A.; Bond, T. A.; Hayes, M. G.; West, J.; Tyrrell, J.; Wright, J.; Bouchard, L.; Murcia, M.; Bustamante, M.; Chadeau-Hyam, M.; Jarvelin, M.-R.; Vrijheid, M.; Perron, P.; Magnus, P.; Gaillard, R.; Jaddoe, V. W. V.; Lowe, W. L.; Feenstra, B.; Hivert, M.-F.; I.A. Sorensen, T.; Haberg, S. E.; Sebert, S.; Magnus, M.; Lawlor, D. A.

2022-07-24 epidemiology
10.1101/2022.07.22.22277930 medRxiv
Show abstract

ImportanceHigher maternal pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI) is associated with adverse pregnancy and perinatal outcomes. However, which of these associations are causal remains unclear. ObjectiveTo explore the relation of maternal pre-pregnancy BMI with pregnancy and perinatal outcomes by integrating evidence from three different methods (i.e. multivariable regression, Mendelian randomization, and paternal negative control analyses). DesignTriangulation of multivariable regression, Mendelian randomization and paternal negative control results from up to 14 studies in the MR-PREG collaboration. SettingEurope and North America. ParticipantsUp to 497,932 women of European ancestry. ExposureMaternal pre- or early-pregnancy BMI based on self-reported or measured weight and height. Main outcomes and MeasuresMiscarriage, stillbirth, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, gestational diabetes, maternal anaemia, perinatal depression, pre-labour rupture of membranes, induction of labour, caesarean section, preterm birth, small- and large-for-gestational age, low and high birthweight, low Apgar score at 1 and 5 minutes, neonatal intensive care unit admission, and no initiation of breastfeeding. ResultsMultivariable regression, Mendelian randomization and paternal negative control analyses supported an association of higher maternal BMI with lower risk of small-for-gestational age and higher risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, gestational diabetes, pre-labour membrane rupture, induction of labour, large-for-gestational age, and high birthweight. As an example, higher maternal BMI was associated with higher risk of gestational hypertension in multivariable regression (OR: 1.67; 95% CI: 1.64, 1.71 per standard unit in BMI) and Mendelian randomization (OR: 1.58; 95% CI: 1.29, 1.93), which was not seen for paternal BMI (OR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.99, 1.05). Findings did not support a relation between maternal BMI and perinatal depression. For other outcomes, evidence was inconclusive due to inconsistencies across the applied approaches or substantial imprecision in effect estimates from Mendelian randomization. Conclusions and RelevanceOur findings support a causal role for maternal pre-/early-pregnancy BMI on a range of adverse pregnancy and perinatal outcomes. Pre-conception interventions to support women maintaining a healthy BMI may reduce the burden of obstetric and neonatal complications. KEY POINTSO_ST_ABSQuestionC_ST_ABSWhat is the effect of higher maternal pre-/early-pregnancy body mass index (BMI) on adverse pregnancy and perinatal outcomes? FindingsWe found consistent evidence that higher maternal BMI was related to higher risk of gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, gestational diabetes, pre-labour membrane rupture, induction of labour, and having a large-for-gestational-age baby, lower risk of having a small-for-gestational-age baby, and not related to perinatal depression. MeaningThese findings highlight the importance of supporting women to achieve/maintain a healthy pre-conception BMI to reduce the burden of obstetric and neonatal complications.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.