H Lindorfer1, M Krebs1, A Kautzky-Willer1, D Bancher-Todesca2, M Sager3, A Gessl1. 1. Department of Internal Medicine III, Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Fetomaternal Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 3. Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety, Vienna, Austria.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVES: In Austria, iodine deficiency has been considered to be eliminated owing to table salt fortification with iodine, but whether this also applies to pregnant women is unclear. Even mild iodine deficiency during gestation may lead to neurocognitive sequelae in the offspring. SUBJECTS/ METHODS: This is a cross-sectional investigation of urinary iodine excretion in 246 pregnant women (first trimester n=2, second trimester n=53, third trimester n=191, gestational diabetes mellitus n=115, no gestational diabetes mellitus n=131). The iodine content of morning spot urine samples was determined using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. RESULTS: Pregnant women in the Vienna area had a median urinary iodine concentration (UIC) of 87 μg/l. Only 13.8% of the cohort were in the recommended range of 150-249 μg/l, whereas 21.5% had a UIC of 0-49 μg/l, 40.2% had a UIC of 50-99 μg/l and 19.5% had a UIC of 100-149 μg/l. In all, 4.9% had a UIC over 250 μg/l. A total of 137 women of foreign origin had a significantly higher iodine excretion compared with Austrian-born women. Maternal or gestational age had no influence on UIC. Although 79 women on iodine supplementation had a significantly higher iodine concentration compared with women without iodine supplementation (97.3 vs 80.1 μg/l, P=0,006), their UIC was below the recommended range, indicating that doses of 100-150 μg per day are not sufficient to normalize iodine excretion. Sodium and iodine concentrations in the urine were tightly correlated (R=0.539, n=61), suggesting that low intake of iodized salt might contribute to insufficient iodine supply. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that pregnant women in the Vienna area have a potentially clinically significant iodine deficiency and that currently recommended doses of iodine supplementation may not be sufficient.
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVES: In Austria, iodine deficiency has been considered to be eliminated owing to table salt fortification with iodine, but whether this also applies to pregnant women is unclear. Even mild iodine deficiency during gestation may lead to neurocognitive sequelae in the offspring. SUBJECTS/ METHODS: This is a cross-sectional investigation of urinary iodine excretion in 246 pregnant women (first trimester n=2, second trimester n=53, third trimester n=191, gestational diabetes mellitus n=115, no gestational diabetes mellitus n=131). The iodine content of morning spot urine samples was determined using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. RESULTS: Pregnant women in the Vienna area had a median urinary iodine concentration (UIC) of 87 μg/l. Only 13.8% of the cohort were in the recommended range of 150-249 μg/l, whereas 21.5% had a UIC of 0-49 μg/l, 40.2% had a UIC of 50-99 μg/l and 19.5% had a UIC of 100-149 μg/l. In all, 4.9% had a UIC over 250 μg/l. A total of 137 women of foreign origin had a significantly higher iodine excretion compared with Austrian-born women. Maternal or gestational age had no influence on UIC. Although 79 women on iodine supplementation had a significantly higher iodine concentration compared with women without iodine supplementation (97.3 vs 80.1 μg/l, P=0,006), their UIC was below the recommended range, indicating that doses of 100-150 μg per day are not sufficient to normalize iodine excretion. Sodium and iodine concentrations in the urine were tightly correlated (R=0.539, n=61), suggesting that low intake of iodized salt might contribute to insufficient iodine supply. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that pregnant women in the Vienna area have a potentially clinically significant iodine deficiency and that currently recommended doses of iodine supplementation may not be sufficient.
Authors: Paul K Whelton; Lawrence J Appel; Ralph L Sacco; Cheryl A M Anderson; Elliott M Antman; Norman Campbell; Sandra B Dunbar; Edward D Frohlich; John E Hall; Mariell Jessup; Darwin R Labarthe; Graham A MacGregor; Frank M Sacks; Jeremiah Stamler; Dorothea K Vafiadis; Linda V Van Horn Journal: Circulation Date: 2012-11-02 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: B Wagner; S B Karup; W Raber; B Schneider; P Nowotny; W Waldhäusl; P Bratusch-Marrain; H Vierhapper Journal: Wien Klin Wochenschr Date: 1998-11-13 Impact factor: 1.704
Authors: Pere Berbel; María Jesús Obregón; Juan Bernal; Francisco Escobar del Rey; Gabriella Morreale de Escobar Journal: Trends Endocrinol Metab Date: 2007-10-24 Impact factor: 12.015
Authors: Sigrun Henjum; Inger Aakre; Anne Marie Lilleengen; Lisa Garnweidner-Holme; Sandra Borthne; Zada Pajalic; Ellen Blix; Elin Lovise Folven Gjengedal; Anne Lise Brantsæter Journal: Nutrients Date: 2018-02-28 Impact factor: 5.717
Authors: Jürgen Harreiter; Karin Schindler; Dagmar Bancher-Todesca; Christian Göbl; Felix Langer; Gerhard Prager; Alois Gessl; Michael Leutner; Bernhard Ludvik; Anton Luger; Alexandra Kautzky-Willer; Michael Krebs Journal: J Obes Date: 2018-06-03
Authors: Christina Tugendsam; Veronika Petz; Wolfgang Buchinger; Brigitta Schmoll-Hauer; Iris Pia Schenk; Karin Rudolph; Michael Krebs; Georg Zettinig Journal: Thyroid Res Date: 2018-05-09