| Literature DB >> 32340341 |
Danuta Dudzik1,2, Isabel Iglesias Platas3,4, Montserrat Izquierdo Renau3,4, Carla Balcells Esponera3,4, Beatriz Del Rey Hurtado de Mendoza3,4, Carles Lerin4,5, Marta Ramón-Krauel4,5, Coral Barbas1.
Abstract
Very preterm infants (VPI, born at or before 32 weeks of gestation) are at risk of adverse health outcomes, from which they might be partially protected with appropriate postnatal nutrition and growth. Metabolic processes or biochemical markers associated to extrauterine growth restriction (EUGR) have not been identified. We applied untargeted metabolomics to plasma samples of VPI with adequate weight for gestational age at birth and with different growth trajectories (29 well-grown, 22 EUGR) at the time of hospital discharge. A multivariate analysis showed significantly higher levels of amino-acids in well-grown patients. Other metabolites were also identified as statistically significant in the comparison between groups. Relevant differences (with corrections for multiple comparison) were found in levels of glycerophospholipids, sphingolipids and other lipids. Levels of many of the biochemical species decreased progressively as the level of growth restriction increased in severity. In conclusion, an untargeted metabolomic approach uncovered previously unknown differences in the levels of a range of plasma metabolites between well grown and EUGR infants at the time of discharge. Our findings open speculation about pathways involved in growth failure in preterm infants and the long-term relevance of this metabolic differences, as well as helping in the definition of potential biomarkers.Entities:
Keywords: growth failure; metabolic fingerprinting; multiplatform untargeted metabolomics; preterm infants
Year: 2020 PMID: 32340341 PMCID: PMC7230608 DOI: 10.3390/nu12041188
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Comparison of nutritional and growth parameters between normally grown and extrauterine growth restriction (EUGR) patients. Categorical values are represented as number (%) and continuous variables as mean (SD). Categorical values were compared with chi-square tests and continuous variables with Student´s t tests.
| Normally Grown ( | EUGR | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| At birth | Gestational age (weeks) | 29.8 (1.8) | 29.4 (1.9) | 0.390 |
| Birthweight (g) | 1402 (294) | 1223 (235) |
| |
| Length at birth (cm) | 39.2 (3.0) | 37.9 (2.6) | 0.091 | |
| Head circumference at birth (cm) | 26.9 (1.9) | 25.9 (2.0) | 0.084 | |
| At discharge | Postmenstrual age (weeks) | 36.8 (2.1) | 37.8 (2.2) | 0.094 |
| Weight at discharge (g) | 2399 (353) | 2216 (444) | 0.108 | |
| Length at discharge (cm) | 45.5 (1.9) | 45.3 (2.5) | 0.796 | |
| Head circumference at discharge (cm) | 32.2 (1.6) | 32.0 (1.4) | 0.424 | |
| Nutrition | Parenteral nutrition (days) | 10.1 (6.9) | 12.3 (7.8) | 0.293 |
| Age at first full enteral feeds (days) | 10.6 (6.7) | 11.8 (4.4) | 0.461 | |
| Average parenteral nutrition 1st week | ||||
| Average enteral nutrition 1st week |
| |||
| Global nutrition 1st week (PN + enteral) | ||||
| Average parenteral nutrition 2nd week | ||||
| Average enteral nutrition 2nd week |
| |||
| Global nutrition 2nd week (PN + enteral) |
| |||
| Feeding at discharge | ||||
| Exclusive own´s mother milk at discharge | 20 (69.0) | 17 (77.3) | 0.510 | |
| Nutritional intake at discharge | ||||
* Chi-square p not calculated due to 50% of cells with an expected count of less than 5. Comparisons with a p–value < 0.05 were considered significant and are highlighted in bold and italic.
Figure 1OPLS-DA scores plot (A) capillary electrophoresis-mass spectrometry, (R2 = 0.66, Q2 = 0.2, CV-ANOVA p = 0.026); (B) gas chromatography-mass spectrometry, (R2 = 0.63, Q2 = 0.034, CV- ANOVA p = 0.036); (C) liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry/ESI+,(R2 = 0.48, Q2 = -0.006, CV- ANOVA, p = 1.000); and (D) liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry /ESI- (R2 = 0.62, Q2 = −0.00006, CV- ANOVA p = 0.046). R2 = coefficient for variance explained; Q2 = coefficient for variance predicted. ▲ non-EUGR, ● EUGR.
Figure 2(A) Panel A. Pie chart representing the distribution of metabolites identified from multiplatform metabolomic analysis that were significantly different between EUGR and non EUGR individuals. (B) Panel B. A hierarchical clustering with heatmap using Euclidean distance measure and Ward clustering algorithm has been applied for statistically significant metabolites, illustrating the differences in the metabolite abundance between non-EUGR, EUGR-mod and EUGR-sev cases. Each colored cell corresponds to an abundance value, where blue indicates the lowest and red the highest value.
Figure 3The scaled relative abundance of statistically significant amino acids reflecting the differences between non-EUGR and EUGR, together with stratification for moderate and severe EUGR cases.