Small for date preterm infants and risk of higher blood pressure in later life: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Expected and Desirable Preterm and Small Infant Growth Patterns

Adequate nutrition is necessary for achieving optimal growth and neurodevelopment. Growth is a natural and expected process that happens concomitantly with rapid advancements in neurodevelopment. Serial weight, length, and head circumference growth measures are essential for monitoring development, although identifying pathological deviations from normal growth can pose challenges. Appropriate growth assessments require considerations that a range of sizes for length, head circumference, and weight are expected and appropriate. Because of genetic differences and morbidities, there is a considerable overlap between the growth of healthy infants and those with growth alterations. Parents tend to be over-concerned about children who plot low on growth charts and often need reassurance. Thus, the use of terms such as "poor" growth or growth "failure" are discouraged when growth is approximately parallel to growth chart curves even if their size is smaller than specific percentiles. No specific percentile should be set as a growth goal; individual variability should be expected. An infant's size at birth is important information that goes beyond the common use of prognostic predictions of appropriate compared with small or large for gestational age. The lower the birthweight, the lower the nutrient stores and the more important the need for nutrition support. Compared to term infants, preterm infants at term-equivalent age have a higher percentage of body fat, but this diminishes over the next months. Current research findings support expert recommendations that preterm infants should grow, after early postnatal weight loss, similar to the fetus and then term-born infants, which translates to growth approximately parallel to growth chart curves. There is no need for a trade-off between optimum cognition and optimum future health. Each high-risk infant needs individualized nutrition and growth assessments. This review aims to examine infant growth expectations and messaging for parents of preterm and term-born infants within the broader causal framework.

Neonatal blood pressure by birth weight, gestational age, and postnatal age: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Blood pressure is a vital hemodynamic marker during the neonatal period. However, normative values are often derived from small observational studies. Understanding the normative range would help to identify ideal thresholds for intervention to treat hypotension or hypertension. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess observed blood pressure values in neonates who have not received any blood-pressure modifying treatments from birth to three months postnatal age and whether these vary according to birth weight, gestational age and postnatal age.

METHODS

This was a systematic review. A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL from 1946 to 2017 on blood pressure in neonates from birth to 3 months of age (PROSPERO ID CRD42018092886). Unpublished data were included where appropriate.

RESULTS

Of 3,587 non-duplicate publications identified, 30 were included (one unpublished study). Twelve studies contained data grouped by birth weight, while 23 contained data grouped by gestational age. Study and clinical heterogeneity precluded meta-analyses thus results are presented by subgroup. A consistent blood pressure rise was associated with increasing birth weight, gestational age, and postnatal age. In addition, blood pressure seemed to rise more rapidly in the most preterm and low birth weight neonates.

CONCLUSION

Despite blood pressure increasing with birth weight, gestational age, and postnatal age, there was marked blood pressure variability observed throughout. To better define hypotension and hypertension, future studies should develop consistent approaches for factors related to blood pressure variability, including the method and timing of measurement as well as statistical control of relevant patient characteristics.

Does the evidence support in utero influences on later health and disease? A systematic review of highly cited Barker studies on developmental origins

The developmental origins of health and disease hypothesis proposes that early exposure to adverse conditions during fetal development and early life have strong detrimental consequences on long-term health and susceptibility to chronic diseases. We conducted a systematic review to critically appraise Barker's highest cited publications using the risk-of-bias assessment tool (ROBINS-I) and investigate effects of overadjustment by later body weight. Our findings revealed that all included studies displayed high risks of bias, with particular concerns regarding confounding (8/8), selection of reported results (8/8), classification of exposure (7/8), selection of participants (5/8) and high rates of missing data (ranged from 15 to 87%). Later body weight was over-adjusted in most (6/8) of the studies. As all studies displayed high bias risk due to confounding, missing data and overadjustment, evidence is insufficient to support causal relationships between low birthweight and adult disease, warranting caution in clinical application. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42023433179.

Small for gestational age preterm infants and later adiposity and height: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Overweight and obesity and their consequent morbidities are important worldwide health problems. Some research suggests excess adiposity origins may begin in fetal life, but unknown is whether this applies to infants born preterm.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to assess the association between small for gestational age (SGA) birth and later adiposity and height among those born preterm.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL until October 2022.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Studies were included if they reported anthropometric (adiposity measures and height) outcomes for participants born preterm with SGA versus non-SGA. Screening, data extraction and risks of bias assessments were conducted in duplicate by two reviewers.

SYNTHESIS

We meta-analysed across studies using random-effects models and explored potential heterogeneity sources.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. In later life, preterm SGA infants had a lower body mass index (-0.66 kg/m2 , 95% CI -0.79, -0.53; 32 studies, I2  = 16.7, n = 30,346), waist circumference (-1.20 cm, 95% CI -2.17, -0.23; 13 studies, I2  = 19.4, n = 2061), lean mass (-2.62 kg, 95% CI -3.45, 1.80; 7 studies, I2  = 0, n = 205) and height (-3.85 cm, 95% CI -4.73, -2.96; 26 studies, I2  = 52.6, n = 4174) compared with those preterm infants born non-SGA. There were no differences between preterm SGA and preterm non-SGA groups in waist/hip ratio, body fat, body fat per cent, truncal fat per cent, fat mass index or lean mass index, although power was limited for some analyses. Studies were rated at high risk of bias due to potential residual confounding and low risk of bias in other domains.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to their preterm non-SGA peers, preterm infants born SGA have lower BMI, waist circumference, lean body mass and height in later life. No differences in adiposity were observed between SGA preterm infants and non-SGA preterm infants.