| Literature DB >> 27685997 |
Simon H J Brown1,2, Samuel R Eather3, Dilys J Freeman4, Barbara J Meyer2,3, Todd W Mitchell2,3.
Abstract
In preeclampsia, maternal insulin resistance leads to defective expansion of adipocytes, enhanced adipocyte lipolysis, up-regulation of very low density lipoprotein synthesis, maternal hypertriglyceridaemia and the potential for ectopic fat storage. Our aim was to quantitate and compare the total amount and type of lipid in placenta from pregnancies complicated with preeclampsia and healthy pregnancies. Quantitative lipid analysis of lipid extracts from full thickness placental biopsies was carried out by shotgun lipidomics. Placental lipid profiles from pregnancies complicated by preeclampsia (n = 23) were compared to healthy pregnancies (n = 68), and placenta from intrauterine growth restriction pregnancies (n = 10) were used to control for gross differences in placental pathology. Placentae from pregnancies complicated with preeclampsia had higher neutral lipid content than healthy placentae (40% higher triacyglycerol (P = 0.001) and 33% higher cholesteryl ester (P = 0.004)) that was specific to preeclampsia and independent of maternal gestation.Entities:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27685997 PMCID: PMC5042456 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0163972
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Maternal demographics and plasma lipids.
| Variable | Control (n = 68) | PET (n = 23) | IUGR (n = 10) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 30.4 (5.1) | 29.5 (5.8) | 29.7 (4.9) | 0.83 |
| BMI (kg/m2) * | 28.9 (6.4) | 30.1 (7.4) | 24.7 (5.5) | 0.068 |
| Primiparous n (%) | 27 (40) | 14 (61) | 4 (40) | 0.20 |
| Smoker n (%) | 14 (21) | 4 (17) | 5 (50) | 0.099 |
| SBP (mmHg) * | 121 (15)1 | 144 (25)2 | 113 (4)1 | <0.0001 |
| DBP (mmHg) * | 71 (10)1 | 91 (16)2 | 72 (3)1,2 | <0.0001 |
| Gestational age at delivery (days) | 275 (9)1 | 253 (21)2 | 253 (21)2 | <0.0001 |
| BWC | 55 (31)1 | 22 (26)2 | 1 (2)2 | <0.0001 |
| Samples collected when not in labour (%) | 51 (75)1 | 6 (26)2 | 6 (60)1,2 | <0.0001 |
| Fetal sex n (% male) | 32 (49) | 13 (57) | 3 (33) | 0.50 |
BMI, Body mass Index; SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; BWC, birth weight centile;
Values are mean (SD) for continuous variables and number (%) for categorical variables.
ANOVA was used to test for differences among groups (*on log transformed data). Different superscript numbers indicate differences between individual groups using post hoc Tukey test. Significance level P<0.05.
Quantitative comparison of class total lipid profiles in placenta.
| Lipid Class (μmol/g tissue) | Control (n = 68) | PET (n = 23) | IUGR (n = 10) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TAG* | 0.20 (0.11)1 | 0.27 (0.12)2 | 0.15 (0.05)1 | 0.001 |
| CE* | 0.31 (0.10)1 | 0.42 (0.16)2 | 0.28 (0.10)1 | 0.004 |
| Cholesterol | 2.9 (0.5)1 | 3.4 (0.8)2 | 3.2 (0.7)1,2 | 0.006 |
| PC | 3.2 (0.8)1 | 3.7 (1.1)2 | 3.5 (1.0)1,2 | 0.025 |
| PE | 0.93 (0.25) | 1.07 (0.38) | 1.01 (0.31) | 0.169 |
| PS | 0.36 (0.09) | 0.40 (0.10) | 0.40 (0.13) | 0.127 |
| SM | 0.71 (0.18) | 0.82 (0.26) | 0.88 (0.22) | 0.014 |
| Total PL | 5.2 (1.2)1 | 6.0 (1.7)2 | 5.7 (1.6)1,2 | 0.029 |
| Cer | 0.06 (0.02) | 0.06 (0.03) | 0.06 (0.02) | 0.605 |
| Total Lipid | 8.6 (1.7)1 | 10.1 (2.4)2 | 9.4 (2.4) 1,2 | 0.006 |
CE, cholesteryl ester; Cer, ceramides; IUGR, intrauterine growth restriction; PC, phosphatidylcholine; PE, phosphatidylethanolamine; PET, preeclampsia; PL, phospholipid; PS, phosphatidylserine; SM, sphingomyelin; TAG, triacylglycerol.
Values are mean (SD).
ANOVA was used to test for differences among groups (*on log transformed data). Different superscript numbers indicate differences between individual groups using post hoc Tukey test. Significance level P<0.05.
Fig 1Storage Lipid Profiles in Placenta.
Quantitative comparison of A) triacylglycerol and B) cholesteryl ester molecular lipid profiles in placenta between control (N = 68), PET (N = 23) and IUGR (N = 10). Values are shown as the mean of all measurements ± SEM. a = p < 0.01 versus control, b = p < 0.01 versus IUGR.
Fig 2Phosphatidylcholine Lipid Profiles in Placenta.
Quantitative comparison of phosphatidylcholine molecular lipid profiles in placenta between control (N = 68), PET (N = 23) and IUGR (N = 10). Values are shown as the mean of all measurements ± SEM. a = p < 0.01 versus control, b = p < 0.01 versus IUGR.
Fig 3Phosphatidylethanolamine Lipid Profiles in Placenta.
Quantitative comparison of phosphatidylethanolamine molecular lipid profiles in placenta between control (N = 68), PET (N = 23) and IUGR (N = 10). Values are shown as the mean of all measurements ± SEM. a = p < 0.01 versus control.
Fig 4Phosphatidylserine and Sphingolipid Lipid Profiles in Placenta. Lipid Profiles in Placenta.
Quantitative comparison of A) phosphatidylserine B) ceramide and C) sphingomyelin molecular lipid profiles in placenta between control (N = 68), PET (N = 23) and IUGR (N = 10). Values are shown as the mean of all measurements ± SEM. a = p < 0.01 versus control.