BACKGROUND: Clinicians often recommend an additional energy intake of 1250 kJ/d to their pregnant patients. Previous studies have shown considerable variation in the metabolic response to pregnancy and thus in the additional energy required to support a pregnancy. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess how well-nourished women meet the energy demands of pregnancy and to identify factors that predict an individual's metabolic response. DESIGN: Resting metabolic rate (RMR), diet-induced thermogenesis (DIT), total energy expenditure (TEE), activity energy expenditure (AEE), energy intake (EI), and body fat mass (FM) were measured longitudinally in 10 women preconception; at 8-10, 24-26, and 34-36 wk of gestation; and 4-6 wk postpartum. RESULTS: Compared with preconception values, individual RMRs increased from 456 to 3389 kJ/d by late pregnancy. DIT varied from -266 to 110 kJ/meal, TEE from -105 to 3421 kJ/d, AEE from -2301 to 2929 kJ/d, EI from -259 to 2176 kJ/d, and FM from a 0.6-kg loss to a 10.6-kg gain. The only prepregnant factor that predicted FM gain was RMR (r = 0.65, P < 0.05). Women with the largest cumulative increase in RMR deposited the least FM (r = -0.64, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Well-nourished women use different strategies to meet the energy demands of pregnancy, including reductions in DIT or AEE, increases in EI, and deposition of less FM than anticipated. The combination of strategies used by individual women is not wholly predictable from prepregnant indexes. The use of a single recommendation for increased energy intake in all pregnant women is not justified.
BACKGROUND: Clinicians often recommend an additional energy intake of 1250 kJ/d to their pregnant patients. Previous studies have shown considerable variation in the metabolic response to pregnancy and thus in the additional energy required to support a pregnancy. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess how well-nourished women meet the energy demands of pregnancy and to identify factors that predict an individual's metabolic response. DESIGN: Resting metabolic rate (RMR), diet-induced thermogenesis (DIT), total energy expenditure (TEE), activity energy expenditure (AEE), energy intake (EI), and body fat mass (FM) were measured longitudinally in 10 women preconception; at 8-10, 24-26, and 34-36 wk of gestation; and 4-6 wk postpartum. RESULTS: Compared with preconception values, individual RMRs increased from 456 to 3389 kJ/d by late pregnancy. DIT varied from -266 to 110 kJ/meal, TEE from -105 to 3421 kJ/d, AEE from -2301 to 2929 kJ/d, EI from -259 to 2176 kJ/d, and FM from a 0.6-kg loss to a 10.6-kg gain. The only prepregnant factor that predicted FM gain was RMR (r = 0.65, P < 0.05). Women with the largest cumulative increase in RMR deposited the least FM (r = -0.64, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Well-nourished women use different strategies to meet the energy demands of pregnancy, including reductions in DIT or AEE, increases in EI, and deposition of less FM than anticipated. The combination of strategies used by individual women is not wholly predictable from prepregnant indexes. The use of a single recommendation for increased energy intake in all pregnant women is not justified.
Authors: Diana M Thomas; Jesus E Navarro-Barrientos; Daniel E Rivera; Steven B Heymsfield; Carl Bredlau; Leanne M Redman; Corby K Martin; Sally A Lederman; Linda M Collins; Nancy F Butte Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2011-12-14 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: André Dallmann; Ibrahim Ince; Michaela Meyer; Stefan Willmann; Thomas Eissing; Georg Hempel Journal: Clin Pharmacokinet Date: 2017-11 Impact factor: 6.447
Authors: Jasper Most; Marshall St Amant; Daniel S Hsia; Abby D Altazan; Diana M Thomas; L Anne Gilmore; Porsha M Vallo; Robbie A Beyl; Eric Ravussin; Leanne M Redman Journal: J Clin Invest Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 14.808
Authors: Qunsheng Dai; Anish A Shah; Rachana V Garde; Bryan A Yonish; Li Zhang; Neil A Medvitz; Sara E Miller; Elizabeth L Hansen; Carrie N Dunn; Thomas M Price Journal: Mol Endocrinol Date: 2013-03-21
Authors: William W Wong; Susan B Roberts; Susan B Racette; Sai Krupa Das; Leanne M Redman; James Rochon; Manjushri V Bhapkar; Lucinda L Clarke; William E Kraus Journal: J Nutr Date: 2014-02-12 Impact factor: 4.798