Fernanda Rebelo1, Dayana Rodrigues Farias1, Roberta Hack Mendes1, Michael Maia Schlüssel2, Gilberto Kac1. 1. Departamento de Nutrição Social e Aplicada, Instituto de Nutrição Josué de Castro, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. 2. Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The maternal cardiovascular system undergoes progressive adaptations throughout pregnancy, causing blood pressure fluctuations. However, no consensus has been established on its normal variation in uncomplicated pregnancies. OBJECTIVE: To describe the variation in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) levels during pregnancy according to early pregnancy body mass index (BMI). METHODS: SBP and DBP were measured during the first, second and third trimesters and at 30-45 days postpartum in a prospective cohort of 189 women aged 20-40 years. BMI (kg/m2) was measured up to the 13th gestational week and classified as normal-weight (<25.0) or excessive weight (≥ 25.0). Longitudinal linear mixed-effects models were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: A decrease in SBP and DBP was observed from the first to the second trimester (βSBP=-0.394; 95%CI: -0.600- -0.188 and βDBP=-0.617; 95%CI: -0.780- -0.454), as was an increase in SBP and DBP up to 30-45 postpartum days (βSBP=0.010; 95%CI: 0.006-0.014 and βDBP=0.015; 95%CI: 0.012-0.018). Women with excessive weight at early pregnancy showed higher mean SBP in all gestational trimesters, and higher mean DBP in the first and third trimesters. Excessive early pregnancy BMI was positively associated with prospective changes in SBP (βSBP=7.055; 95%CI: 4.499-9.610) and in DBP (βDBP=3.201; 95%CI: 1.136-5.266). CONCLUSION: SBP and DBP decreased from the first to the second trimester and then increased up to the postpartum period. Women with excessive early pregnancy BMI had higher SBP and DBP than their normal-weight counterparts throughout pregnancy, but not in the postpartum period.
BACKGROUND: The maternal cardiovascular system undergoes progressive adaptations throughout pregnancy, causing blood pressure fluctuations. However, no consensus has been established on its normal variation in uncomplicated pregnancies. OBJECTIVE: To describe the variation in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) levels during pregnancy according to early pregnancy body mass index (BMI). METHODS: SBP and DBP were measured during the first, second and third trimesters and at 30-45 days postpartum in a prospective cohort of 189 women aged 20-40 years. BMI (kg/m2) was measured up to the 13th gestational week and classified as normal-weight (<25.0) or excessive weight (≥ 25.0). Longitudinal linear mixed-effects models were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: A decrease in SBP and DBP was observed from the first to the second trimester (βSBP=-0.394; 95%CI: -0.600- -0.188 and βDBP=-0.617; 95%CI: -0.780- -0.454), as was an increase in SBP and DBP up to 30-45 postpartum days (βSBP=0.010; 95%CI: 0.006-0.014 and βDBP=0.015; 95%CI: 0.012-0.018). Women with excessive weight at early pregnancy showed higher mean SBP in all gestational trimesters, and higher mean DBP in the first and third trimesters. Excessive early pregnancy BMI was positively associated with prospective changes in SBP (βSBP=7.055; 95%CI: 4.499-9.610) and in DBP (βDBP=3.201; 95%CI: 1.136-5.266). CONCLUSION: SBP and DBP decreased from the first to the second trimester and then increased up to the postpartum period. Women with excessive early pregnancy BMI had higher SBP and DBP than their normal-weight counterparts throughout pregnancy, but not in the postpartum period.
The maternal cardiovascular system undergoes progressive adaptations throughout
pregnancy, including decreased vascular resistance, increased blood volume, and other
metabolic changes[1]. Although the
effects of these changes on systemic blood pressure (BP) have been described in many
studies, there is no consensus on its normal variation in uncomplicated
pregnancies[2,3].Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) represent a major obstetric complication that
affects 5%-10% of pregnancies, depending on characteristics of the study population, and
are one of the leading causes of maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality
worldwide[4]. HDP include chronic
hypertension, gestational hypertension, preeclampsia and eclampsia, being considered the
second most common cause of direct maternal death in developed countries[5].The etiology of HDP is not clear; however, there are several risk factors associated
with their occurrence, such as body mass index (BMI)[6]. As the prevalence of obesity increases in women of reproductive
age[7], BMI [weight
(kg)/stature[2]
(m2)] and its associated complications represent a relevant public
health matter. Maternal obesity is a significant risk factor for morbidity and mortality
for both mother and fetus[8]. A
systematic review has demonstrated that an increase of approximately 5-7
kg/m2 units in BMI was associated with a two-fold increased risk
of preeclampsia[9].Given these previous findings, this study aims to describe the variation in systolic
blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) levels during uncomplicated
pregnancy, according to BMI.
Methods
This prospective cohort study was conducted at a prenatal care unit in Rio de Janeiro,
Brazil. The enrollment of pregnant women occurred freely and continuously between
November 2009 and October 2011. The follow-up period lasted until July 2012. A total of
258 women were recruited according to the following criteria: being less than 13-week
pregnant at enrollment, being 20 to 40 years old and being free from any infectious or
chronic diseases (except obesity). The study comprised four follow-up waves:
4th-13th week (first trimester),
14th-27th week (second trimester),
28th-40th week (third trimester), and 30-45 postpartum days.
The first follow-up wave included two visits on different days; BP and BMI data were
obtained during the first visit, and all other covariates used for adjustment in the
analysis were collected during the second visit. Women who underwent the first follow-up
visit but quit before the second visit (n=6) were excluded from the analysis, as were
those with the following characteristics: twin pregnancies (n=4); diagnosis of an
infectious or non-communicable disease (n=17); miscarriage (n=25); and BP not measured
in the specified interval (n=17). The final sample was composed of 189 pregnant women
(Figure 1).
Figure 1
Flowchart illustrating the process of recruitment of women attending the prenatal
care at a Public Health Center. Rio de Janeiro, 2009 – 2011
Flowchart illustrating the process of recruitment of women attending the prenatal
care at a Public Health Center. Rio de Janeiro, 2009 – 2011Systolic and diastolic BP were measured using an automated oscillometric BP monitoring
system (HEM-742, OMRON, São Paulo, Brazil) validated according to the
international protocol of the European Society of Hypertension[10]. Blood pressure was measured after the women had rested
for at least five minutes and were seated comfortably with their back supported, their
legs uncrossed and their feet flat on the floor. Clothing was removed from the arm in
which the cuff was placed. The arm was supported at heart level, with the palm facing up
and the elbow slightly flexed. The women were advised not to speak during the procedure.
Different cuff sizes, based on the upper arm circumference at the time of each
measurement, were used. Blood pressure was measured twice at the first trimester (in two
distinct days) to determine if the women had chronic hypertension (values of SBP
≥ 140 or DBP ≥ 90 mm Hg, before the 20th gestational week).
Each measurement of BP was performed in duplicate, for all follow-up waves, with an
approximate 30-minute interval between measurements. The mean values of the duplicate
measurements from each time-point were used for analysis[11].The women were weighed with a digital scale (Filizola Ltd., São Paulo, Brazil),
and their stature was measured in duplicate with a Seca Portable Stadiometer (Seca Ltd.,
Hamburg, Germany). The mean of the duplicate standing height values was used to
calculate BMI. Early pregnancy BMI was obtained prior to the 13th gestational
week. Anthropometric measurements were standardized and performed by trained
interviewers[12]. The BMI was
classified into two categories, using the cutoff points proposed by the World Health
Organization[13] (normal weight,
18.5–24.9 kg/m2; excessive weight, ≥25.0 kg/m2). The two
BMI categories were created by joining underweight with normal-weight women and
overweight with obesewomen; only seven women were underweight, and the sensitivity
analysis showed no difference in terms of magnitude or significance in the results
whether underweight women were included or excluded.The gestational age (in weeks) was estimated using, preferably, ultrasound performed
before the 26th week of pregnancy or, alternatively, the last menstrual
period reported. The following variables were also considered in the analysis: maternal
age (years); self-reported skin color (white/black/brown); parity
(nulliparous/multiparous); current smoking status (yes/no); marital status (lives with a
partner/does not live with a partner); education (<8/≥8 years) and practice of
leisure time physical activity (LTPA) before pregnancy (yes/no). The dependent variables
were tested for normality using the Shapiro-Wilk test. Possible differences in the
distributions of the confounders, according to the BMI categories, were assessed using
the chi-square test for proportions. The pattern in BP change was assessed using
longitudinal linear regression models, which used SBP and DBP as dependent variables and
gestational age and quadratic gestational age as time independent variables. In order to
improve model adequacy, a quadratic term for gestational age was used. Prospective
changes in SBP and DBP, according to early pregnancy BMI, were assessed with
longitudinal linear regression after adjustment for confounders, including parity,
current smoking status, marital status, years of education and LTPA. Comparisons between
eligible women lost during the follow-up and the final sample were performed with
chi-square test for proportions.The statistical analyses were performed using Stata Data Analysis and Statistical
Software (STATA) version 12.0 (Stata Corp., College Station, Texas, USA). Differences
were considered statistically significant when the p-value < 0.05.The study protocol was approved by the research ethics committee of the Municipal
Secretary of Health of the city of Rio de Janeiro (registration number:
0139.0.314.000-09). All participants signed a two-way term of consent, which was
obtained freely and spontaneously after all necessary explanations had been
provided.
Results
The sample characteristics did not differ according to early pregnancy BMI categories
(p>0.05). The majority of women were younger than 30 years (73.5%), brown or black
(73.5%), multiparous (58.2%), lived with a partner (78.8%), had at least eight years of
education (71.4%) and did not participate in LTPA prior to pregnancy (74.3%) (Table 1). None of these variables significantly
differed between eligible women lost to follow-up and the final sample, indicating a
non-selective loss (data not shown).
Table 1
General characteristics of the study sample, according to early pregnancy Body
Mass Index (BMI) of women followed at a public health center in the city of Rio de
Janeiro, Brazil, 2009 - 2012
BMI ‡ categories
Characteristics
Total
Normal-weight
Excessive weight
p-value*
n (%)
n (%)
n (%)
Maternal age (years)
< 30
139 (73.5)
78 (72.9)
61 (74.4)
0.818
≥ 30
50 (26.5)
29 (27.1)
21 (25.6)
Self-reported skin color
White
50 (26.5)
27 (25.2)
23 (28.0)
0.664
Brown or black
139 (73.5)
80 (74.8)
59 (72.0)
Parity
0
79 (41.8)
43 (40.2)
36 (43.9)
0.608
≥ 1
110 (58.2)
64 (59.8)
46 (56.1)
Current smoking
Yes
15 (92.1)
7 (6.5)
8 (9.8)
0.418
No
174 (7.9)
100 (93.5)
74 (90.2)
Marital status
Lives with a partner
149 (78.8)
87 (81.3)
62 (75.6)
0.342
Do not live with a partner
40 (21.2)
20 (18.7)
20 (24.4)
Education (years)
< 8
54 (28.6)
31 (29.0)
23 (28.0)
0.889
≥ 8
135 (71.4)
76 (71.0)
59 (72.0)
Practice of LTPA† before
pregnancy
Yes
48 (25.7)
28 (26.4)
20 (24.7)
0.789
No
139 (74.3)
78 (73.6)
61 (75.3)
p-value refers to a chi-square test for proportions;
LTPA: leisure time physical activity;
BMI: body mass index (normal-weight < 25 kg/m2; excessive weight
≥ 25 kg/m2).
General characteristics of the study sample, according to early pregnancy Body
Mass Index (BMI) of women followed at a public health center in the city of Rio de
Janeiro, Brazil, 2009 - 2012p-value refers to a chi-square test for proportions;LTPA: leisure time physical activity;BMI: body mass index (normal-weight < 25 kg/m2; excessive weight
≥ 25 kg/m2).For the overall sample, the mean SBP values for the first, second and third trimesters
and postpartum (95% CI) were 109.7 (108.4 – 111.1), 107.8 (106.4 – 109.2), 111.0 (109.5
– 112.5) and 114.6 (112.9 – 116.3), respectively. The mean DBP values for the first,
second and third trimesters and postpartum were 66.7 (65.6 – 67.8), 64.4 (63.3 – 65.4),
67.0 (65.8 – 68.1), and 73.3 (72.0 – 74.7), respectively. The longitudinal regression
coefficients for SBP and DBP decreased from the first to the second trimester
[βSBP=-0.394 (-0.600 – -0.188),
βDBP=-0.617 (-0.780 – -0.454)] and then increased from the
second trimester to the postpartum period [βSBP=0.010 (0.006 –
0.014), βDBP=-0.015 (-0.767 – -0.442)] (Figure 2).
Figure 2
Mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure changes during pregnancy and 30-45 days
post-partum of women followed at a public health center in the city of Rio de
Janeiro, Brazil, 2009 - 2012
Note: β1,2: the longitudinal linear regression
coefficients for gestational age and quadratic gestational age, respectively; CI:
Confidence interval. *p-value < 0.001 refers to maximum likelihood estimator.
Mean (95% CI) gestational weeks or days postpartum and number of participants (n)
in each follow-up evaluation: 1st trimester: 9.7 (9.4 – 10.0) weeks, n
= 189; 2nd trimester = 23.7 (23.4 – 24.0) weeks, n=157; 3rd
trimester: 32.4 (32.0 – 32.8) weeks, n = 162; postpartum: 36.4 (34.9 – 37.9) days,
n = 153.
Mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure changes during pregnancy and 30-45 days
post-partum of women followed at a public health center in the city of Rio de
Janeiro, Brazil, 2009 - 2012Note: β1,2: the longitudinal linear regression
coefficients for gestational age and quadratic gestational age, respectively; CI:
Confidence interval. *p-value < 0.001 refers to maximum likelihood estimator.
Mean (95% CI) gestational weeks or days postpartum and number of participants (n)
in each follow-up evaluation: 1st trimester: 9.7 (9.4 – 10.0) weeks, n
= 189; 2nd trimester = 23.7 (23.4 – 24.0) weeks, n=157; 3rd
trimester: 32.4 (32.0 – 32.8) weeks, n = 162; postpartum: 36.4 (34.9 – 37.9) days,
n = 153.The mean SBP significantly differed among the BMI groups in all gestational trimesters.
The mean DBP was significantly higher among overweight/obesewomen in the first and
third trimesters only. Neither SBP nor DBP differed between BMI groups at postpartum.
The longitudinal linear regression model showed that BMI was positively associated with
prospective changes in SBP and DBP [β=7.055 (4.499 – 9.610) and
β=3.201 (1.136 – 5.266), respectively] throughout pregnancy (Figure 3).
Figure 3
Mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure changes during pregnancy according to
BMI categories of women followed at a public health center in the city of Rio de
Janeiro, Brazil, 2009 - 2012
Note: β1: longitudinal linear regression
coefficient for body mass index category excessive weight (reference category:
normal weight) adjusted for gestational age, quadratic gestational age, parity,
current smoking status, marital status, education, practice of leisure time
physical activity before pregnancy. CI: confidence interval; normal-weight <25
kg/m2; excessive weight ≥ 25 kg/m2. *p-value
<0.001 and **p-value: 0.002 refers to maximum likelihood estimator. Mean (95%
CI) gestational weeks or days post-partum and number of participants (n) in each
follow-up evaluation: 1st trimester: 9.7 (9.4 – 10.0) weeks, n = 189;
2nd trimester: 23.7 (23.4 – 24.0) weeks, n = 157; 3rd
trimester: 32.4 (32.0 – 32.8) weeks, n = 162; postpartum: 36.4 (34.9 – 37.9) days,
n = 153.
Mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure changes during pregnancy according to
BMI categories of women followed at a public health center in the city of Rio de
Janeiro, Brazil, 2009 - 2012Note: β1: longitudinal linear regression
coefficient for body mass index category excessive weight (reference category:
normal weight) adjusted for gestational age, quadratic gestational age, parity,
current smoking status, marital status, education, practice of leisure time
physical activity before pregnancy. CI: confidence interval; normal-weight <25
kg/m2; excessive weight ≥ 25 kg/m2. *p-value
<0.001 and **p-value: 0.002 refers to maximum likelihood estimator. Mean (95%
CI) gestational weeks or days post-partum and number of participants (n) in each
follow-up evaluation: 1st trimester: 9.7 (9.4 – 10.0) weeks, n = 189;
2nd trimester: 23.7 (23.4 – 24.0) weeks, n = 157; 3rd
trimester: 32.4 (32.0 – 32.8) weeks, n = 162; postpartum: 36.4 (34.9 – 37.9) days,
n = 153.
Discussion
The main findings of this study corroborate the known BP pattern during healthy
pregnancy. The study women experienced a mid-trimester drop, followed by a progressive
increase in SBP and DBP up to 30-45 postpartum days. Furthermore, our results indicated
a strong association between early pregnancy BMI and SBP/DBP. Women who began pregnancy
with a BMI in the overweight or obese categories presented higher values of SBP and DBP
in all gestational trimesters.Although many studies have shown this same BP pattern during pregnancy[14-17], some authors have found different results, such as a mid-trimester
BP rise instead of a drop[18-20]. For this reason, the publication of new
findings is still necessary. The description of usual values and variations of SBP and
DBP in healthy pregnancies is important for prenatal practitioners to detect abnormal
variations that may be related to the onset of a disorder. Studies to elucidate this
issue should be encouraged.Grindheim et al.[17] have followed a
cohort with four visits during pregnancy to evaluate BP variation. Their sample was very
similar to ours in terms of age, parity, BMI, and gestational age at BP measurements.
The main finding of this study was the statistically significant drop in SBP and DBP up
to mid-pregnancy (22-24 weeks), followed by a progressive increase until delivery, which
corroborates our results. However, their sample was smaller (n = 63) and comprised only
Norwegian women, which is a very homogeneous population.[17]Nama et al.[20] have found a progressive
increase in SBP and DBP in a sample of primiparous, healthy, white pregnant women
residing in London. The authors have discussed the importance of conducting similar
studies with heterogeneous populations, considering factors such as BMI. Other studies
have also found progressive increases in SBP in homogeneous populations[18-19]. However, there are no studies that have monitored BP in healthy,
adult, pregnant women from Brazil, a country composed of a very heterogeneous
population.Another point to be considered is the mean SBP and DBP values in our study. Other
similar investigations have found markedly higher values in all pregnancy
trimesters[19,21-23], similar to
the highest BMI group in our sample. In a recent study, MacDonald-Wallis et
al.[23], in an attempt to
establish BP reference values during pregnancy, have found higher mean SBP and DBP
values at 12 and 37 weeks of normal pregnancies as compared to our results. Given that
the possibility of changing the cutoff points for the diagnosis of HDP has been
discussed, it is important to consider the differences in BP values for different
populations and BMI categories[24].Although a similar pattern of variability in normal-weight and excessive-weight women
was observed, those who began pregnancy as overweight or obese showed significantly
higher values of SBP in all trimesters and of DBP in the first and third trimesters of
pregnancy. Similar results have been observed in other populations[16,19]. This indicates that the normal variation of BP is different between
BMI categories. If a woman with a normal BMI has a SBP or DBP level below 140 or 90 mm
Hg, respectively, but above the mean for her BMI, it may indicate an increased risk for
adverse outcomes when compared with a woman who initiated pregnancy obese and has
similar absolute BP values.Some authors consider postpartum BP as the normal BP of nonpregnant women; postpartum BP
is sometimes used as a pre-pregnancy measure[17]. Extrapolating for our results, it can be said that there is no
BP variability outside pregnancy between BMI groups. Putting together, the significant
difference of BP between groups in the first trimester indicates that the BP drop in
early pregnancy is probably higher among those with a lower BMI.Some strengths and limitations of this study should be highlighted. This is the first
study to assess longitudinal BP data in a group of Brazilian pregnant women.
Furthermore, we used a robust statistical analysis, considering the data as repeated
measures, not merely comparing means. As limitations, the evaluation of additional
points during pregnancy would provide a more complete pattern of variability. Moreover,
the use of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring to measure variations throughout the day
would be important. Another potential limitation is the loss to follow-up of 11.3% of
study participants. However, the statistical technique employed to investigate the
influence of BMI on BP is efficient even when there are some values missing from the
study sample[25].
Conclusion
This study provides new data about the pattern of BP variability throughout pregnancy,
an issue that has been of great interest in recent years. We found that SBP and DBP
decreased from early to mid-pregnancy and then increased up to 30-45 postpartum days.
The findings also reinforced the role of BMI on SBP and DBP, highlighting the importance
of considering this variable in studies assessing BP in pregnancy, as well as during
prenatal care monitoring.
Authors: Romy Gaillard; Rachel Bakker; Sten P Willemsen; Albert Hofman; Eric A P Steegers; Vincent W V Jaddoe Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2011-08-06 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Thomas G Pickering; John E Hall; Lawrence J Appel; Bonita E Falkner; John Graves; Martha N Hill; Daniel W Jones; Theodore Kurtz; Sheldon G Sheps; Edward J Roccella Journal: Circulation Date: 2005-02-08 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Lissa N Mandell; Manasi S Parrish; Violeta J Rodriguez; Maria L Alcaide; Stephen M Weiss; Karl Peltzer; Deborah L Jones Journal: AIDS Behav Date: 2021-10-14
Authors: Linnea Bärebring; Maria Bullarbo; Anna Glantz; Monica Leu Agelii; Åse Jagner; Joy Ellis; Lena Hulthén; Inez Schoenmakers; Hanna Augustin Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-03-29 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Ary I Savitri; Peter Zuithoff; Joyce L Browne; Dwirani Amelia; Mohammad Baharuddin; Diederick E Grobbee; Cuno S P M Uiterwaal Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2016-08-11 Impact factor: 2.692