| Literature DB >> 31804000 |
Zheng Cao1, Jingrui Liu1, Xin Xie1, Sien Zhan1, Wei Song2, Shaowen Wu2, Zheng Sun3, Ying Dong1, Guodong Tang1,4, Yilin Liu5, Lin Li6, Min Shen7, Yanhong Zhai1, Jihua Zou7, Xiaowei Liu2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The pulmonary surfactant especially lipids in amniotic fluid can reflect the development stage of fetal lung maturity (FLM). However, the conventional lecithin/sphingomyelin (L/S) ratio method by thin layer chromatography (TLC) is insufficient and inconvenient for FLM prediction in clinical practice.Entities:
Keywords: FLM; L/S ratio; LC-HRMS; amniotic fluid; lipidomics
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31804000 PMCID: PMC7171342 DOI: 10.1002/jcla.23109
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Clin Lab Anal ISSN: 0887-8013 Impact factor: 2.352
Figure 1The principal component analysis (PCA) score plot of the 6 quality control (QC) and amniotic fluid samples. QC samples were applied to exhibit the stability of the LC‐HRMS system. The cluster of the QC samples in the PCA score scatter plot showed a satisfactory stability and repeatability of this lipidomic analysis approach. The colors display the subjects from different groups. The green dots represent QC samples, and the blue dots represent amniotic fluid samples
The results of L/S ratio and LBC with 33 amniotic fluid samples
| No. | L/S ratio | LBC | Sampling GW | FLM |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1.84 | 1 | 18 | — |
| 2 | 1.50 | 2 | 18 | — |
| 3 | 1.57 | 2 | 18 | — |
| 4 | 1.94 | 2 | 18 | — |
| 5 | 1.30 | 2 | 18 | — |
| 6 | 2.27 | 1 | 18 | — |
| 7 | 1.71 | 2 | 18 | — |
| 8 | 5.05 | 75 | 32 | Premature |
| 9 | 1.99 | 48 | 35 | Premature |
| 10 | 2.13 | 56 | 36 | Premature |
| 11 | 15.24 | 65 | 36 | Premature |
| 12 | 33.92 | 57 | 39 | Mature |
| 13 | 45.71 | 57 | 38 | Mature |
| 14 | 99.69 | 58 | 37 | Mature |
| 15 | 63.11 | 56 | 36 | Mature |
| 16 | 96.00 | 53 | 35 | Mature |
| 17 | 57.81 | 55 | 38 | Mature |
| 18 | 41.36 | 55 | 37 | Mature |
| 19 | 49.58 | 52 | 37 | Mature |
| 20 | 61.14 | 57 | 39 | Mature |
| 21 | 26.76 | 58 | 36 | Mature |
| 22 | 54.35 | 48 | 39 | Mature |
| 23 | 58.40 | 56 | 39 | Mature |
| 24 | 55.85 | 56 | 37 | Mature |
| 25 | 107.17 | 60 | 39 | Mature |
| 26 | 65.10 | 60 | 37 | Mature |
| 27 | 112.93 | 55 | 37 | Mature |
| 28 | 18.88 | 53 | 37 | Mature |
| 29 | 40.81 | 56 | 39 | Mature |
| 30 | 46.72 | 53 | 37 | Mature |
| 31 | 61.20 | 56 | 37 | Mature |
| 32 | 33.92 | 53 | 38 | Mature |
| 33 | 59.32 | 82 | 37 | Mature |
L/S ratio: lecithin/sphingomyelin ratio.
LBC: lamellar body counts.
GW: gestational week.
FLM: fetal lung maturity.
The clinical performance of L/S ratio and LBC in FLM prediction
| N = 33 | Premature | Mature | Sensitivity | Specificity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| L/S < 10.0 | 10 | 0 | 91% | 100% |
| L/S> 10.0 | 1 | 22 | ||
| LBC < 50 × 109/L | 8 | 1 | 73% | 95% |
| LBC> 50 × 109/L | 3 | 21 |
FLM: fetal lung maturity; L/S: lecithin/sphingomyelin ratio; LBC: lamellar body counts.
Figure 2The pathway analysis of lipid metabolism among amniotic fluid of different FLM development status, presenting metabolic pathways arranged according to the scores from enrichment analysis (y‐axis) and from topology analysis (x‐axis). The darkness of the circles stands for the statistical significance in the corresponding pathway, and the radius represents the centrality measures. The pathway analysis details were elaborated in Table 4. A, comparison of lipid metabolism between premature group (GW < 37) and control group (GW = 18); B, comparison of lipid metabolism between mature group (GW < 37) and control group (GW = 18); C, comparison of lipid metabolism between mature group (GW> 38) and control group (GW = 18)
Details for lipid metabolic pathway analysis in Figure 2
| Pathway name | ‐Log( | Impact | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Figure | 1‐Linoleic acid metabolism | 9.1297 | 0.66 |
| 2‐Glycerophospholipid metabolism | 7.1824 | 0.23 | |
| 3‐Glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI)‐anchor biosynthesis | 4.0539 | 0.04 | |
| 4‐Alpha‐linolenic acid metabolism | 3.3319 | 0 | |
| 5‐Arachidonic acid metabolism | 2.5859 | 0 | |
| Figure | 1‐Glycerophospholipid metabolism | 12.445 | 0.23 |
| 2‐Glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI)‐anchor biosynthesis | 4.0539 | 0.04 | |
| 3‐Linoleic acid metabolism | 3.9853 | 0 | |
| 4‐Alpha‐linolenic acid metabolism | 3.3319 | 0 | |
| 5‐Arachidonic acid metabolism | 2.5859 | 0 | |
| Figure | 1‐Glycerophospholipid metabolism | 8.2707 | 0.23 |
| 2‐Glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI)‐anchor biosynthesis | 4.4566 | 0.04 | |
| 3‐Linoleic acid metabolism | 4.3879 | 0 | |
| 4‐Alpha‐linolenic acid metabolism | 3.7315 | 0 | |
| 5‐Arachidonic acid metabolism | 2.9786 | 0 |
‐Log(p) represents levels of statistical significance of p value from pathway enrichment analysis.
Impact represents the normalized pathway impact value from pathway topology analysis, which indicates the location and importance of the significant different metabolites in the corresponding metabolic pathway. (Note: The pathway with impact value 0 means a little association but cannot be neglected.)
Top 10 significantly increased lipids in the fetal lung mature group
| Compounds | Fold change (M/N) | VIP value |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| PC(20:4/0:0) | 6.7425 | 1.54297 | 0.000004729 |
| PC(20:4/14:0) | 4.4273 | 1.41996 | 0.000135970 |
| PC(20:4/20:3) | 3.3143 | 1.29499 | 0.000004357 |
| PC(P‐18:0/18:1) | 2.8585 | 1.14608 | 0.000380290 |
| SM(d16:1/17:0) | 2.7519 | 1.14195 | 0.000051375 |
| PC(O‐16:0/18:1) | 2.5012 | 1.2332 | 0.000005028 |
| PC(P‐18:0/20:4) | 2.4672 | 1.285 | 0.000000489 |
| PC(16:1/14:0) | 2.4554 | 1.12362 | 0.000184340 |
| PE(16:0/16:0) | 2.2939 | 1.25171 | 0.000117060 |
| PC(18:2/19:0) | 2.2626 | 1.38155 | 0.0000898380 |
M/N: mature/premature.
VIP value: variable importance for the projection value.