Mario Murcia1, Ferran Ballester2, Ashley Michel Enning3, Carmen Iñiguez4, Damaskini Valvi5, Mikel Basterrechea6, Marisa Rebagliato7, Jesús Vioque8, Maite Maruri9, Adonina Tardon10, Isolina Riaño-Galán11, Martine Vrijheid12, Sabrina Llop4. 1. Spanish Consortium for Research on Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Spain; Epidemiology and Environmental Health Joint Research Unit, FISABIO-Universitat Jaume I-Universitat de València, Valencia, Spain. Electronic address: murcia_mar@gva.es. 2. Spanish Consortium for Research on Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Spain; Epidemiology and Environmental Health Joint Research Unit, FISABIO-Universitat Jaume I-Universitat de València, Valencia, Spain; Nursing Department, Universitat de València, Valencia, Spain. 3. ISGlobal, Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology (CREAL), Barcelona, Spain; Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain. 4. Spanish Consortium for Research on Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Spain; Epidemiology and Environmental Health Joint Research Unit, FISABIO-Universitat Jaume I-Universitat de València, Valencia, Spain. 5. Spanish Consortium for Research on Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Spain; ISGlobal, Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology (CREAL), Barcelona, Spain; Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain; Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, USA. 6. Spanish Consortium for Research on Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Spain; Public Health Division of Gipuzkoa, San Sebastián, Spain; Health Research Institute (BIODONOSTIA), San Sebastián, Spain. 7. Spanish Consortium for Research on Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Spain; Epidemiology and Environmental Health Joint Research Unit, FISABIO-Universitat Jaume I-Universitat de València, Valencia, Spain; Medicine Department, Universitat Jaume I, Castelló de la Plana, Spain. 8. Spanish Consortium for Research on Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Spain; Universidad Miguel Hernández, San Juan de Alicante, Spain. 9. OSI Goierri-Alto Urola, Centro de Salud de Azkoitia, Spain. 10. Spanish Consortium for Research on Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Spain; IUOPA-Universidad de Oviedo, Spain. 11. Spanish Consortium for Research on Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Spain; Pediatric Unit, Hospital San Agustin, Aviles, Spain. 12. Spanish Consortium for Research on Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Spain; ISGlobal, Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology (CREAL), Barcelona, Spain; Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Results regarding the association between mercury exposure and anthropometry at birth, gestational length and placental weight are inconsistent, as is the role of seafood intake in these associations. OBJECTIVE: We assessed whether prenatal mercury exposure is associated with anthropometry at birth, placental weight and gestational length in a population with a relatively high exposure to mercury from seafood consumption. METHODS: Total mercury (T-Hg) was determined in cord blood from 1869 newborns with birth outcome measures, within the Spanish multicenter INMA cohort from 2004 to 2008. We adjusted cohort specific linear and Cox regression models to evaluate the association between T-Hg and birth anthropometry (weight, length, and head circumference), placental weight and gestational length. Non-spontaneous labor was taken to be censoring in the survival analysis. Final estimates were obtained using meta-analysis. RESULTS: Geometric mean T-Hg was 8.2μg/L. A doubling of T-Hg was associated with a 7.7g decrease in placental weight (95% CI: -13.6, -1.8) and marginally with head circumference (beta: -0.052cm, 95% CI: -0.109, 0.005). T-Hg was also inversely related to weight and length, although with weaker estimates. Mercury exposure was not associated with the length of gestation. The inverse relation between T-Hg and growth was enhanced when the intake of different seafood groups was adjusted for in the models. CONCLUSIONS: Prenatal mercury exposure may be associated with reduced placental and fetal growth. Confounding by fish intake should be considered when assessing these relationships.
BACKGROUND: Results regarding the association between mercury exposure and anthropometry at birth, gestational length and placental weight are inconsistent, as is the role of seafood intake in these associations. OBJECTIVE: We assessed whether prenatal mercury exposure is associated with anthropometry at birth, placental weight and gestational length in a population with a relatively high exposure to mercury from seafood consumption. METHODS: Total mercury (T-Hg) was determined in cord blood from 1869 newborns with birth outcome measures, within the Spanish multicenter INMA cohort from 2004 to 2008. We adjusted cohort specific linear and Cox regression models to evaluate the association between T-Hg and birth anthropometry (weight, length, and head circumference), placental weight and gestational length. Non-spontaneous labor was taken to be censoring in the survival analysis. Final estimates were obtained using meta-analysis. RESULTS: Geometric mean T-Hg was 8.2μg/L. A doubling of T-Hg was associated with a 7.7g decrease in placental weight (95% CI: -13.6, -1.8) and marginally with head circumference (beta: -0.052cm, 95% CI: -0.109, 0.005). T-Hg was also inversely related to weight and length, although with weaker estimates. Mercury exposure was not associated with the length of gestation. The inverse relation between T-Hg and growth was enhanced when the intake of different seafood groups was adjusted for in the models. CONCLUSIONS: Prenatal mercury exposure may be associated with reduced placental and fetal growth. Confounding by fish intake should be considered when assessing these relationships.
Authors: Damaskini Valvi; Youssef Oulhote; Pal Weihe; Christine Dalgård; Kristian S Bjerve; Ulrike Steuerwald; Philippe Grandjean Journal: Environ Int Date: 2017-07-25 Impact factor: 9.621
Authors: Tracy Punshon; Zhigang Li; Brian P Jackson; W Tony Parks; Megan Romano; David Conway; Emily R Baker; Margaret R Karagas Journal: Environ Int Date: 2019-03-07 Impact factor: 9.621
Authors: Joseph H Hoover; Esther Erdei; David Begay; Melissa Gonzales; Jeffery M Jarrett; Po-Yung Cheng; Johnnye Lewis Journal: Environ Res Date: 2020-07-17 Impact factor: 6.498
Authors: Christina Balthasar; Herbert Stangl; Raimund Widhalm; Sebastian Granitzer; Markus Hengstschläger; Claudia Gundacker Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2017-08-08 Impact factor: 5.923
Authors: Leah Zilversmit; Jeffrey Wickliffe; Arti Shankar; Robert J Taylor; Emily W Harville Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2017-07-14 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Gaitree K Baldewsingh; Ashna D Hindori-Mohangoo; Edward D van Eer; Hannah H Covert; Arti Shankar; Jeffrey K Wickliffe; Lizheng Shi; Maureen Y Lichtveld; Wilco C W R Zijlmans Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-06-12 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Gaitree K Baldewsingh; Jeffrey K Wickliffe; Edward D van Eer; Arti Shankar; Ashna D Hindori-Mohangoo; Emily W Harville; Hannah H Covert; Lizheng Shi; Maureen Y Lichtveld; Wilco C W R Zijlmans Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-06-05 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Kyle Dack; Matthew Fell; Caroline M Taylor; Alexandra Havdahl; Sarah J Lewis Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-07-03 Impact factor: 3.390