Next Article in Journal
The Sex Difference in 6-h Ultra-Marathon Running—The Worldwide Trends from 1982 to 2020
Next Article in Special Issue
Extremely Rare Case of Fetal Anemia Due to Mitochondrial Disease Managed with Intrauterine Transfusion
Previous Article in Journal
In-Hospital and Long-Term Outcomes in Patients with Head and Neck Cancer Bleeding
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Medicina
Volume 58
Issue 2
10.3390/medicina58020178
medicina-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor Levels in Cord Blood from Growth Restricted Fetuses with Doppler Alteration Compared to Adequate for Gestational Age Fetuses

by
Jara Pascual-Mancho
1,2,3,4,
Pilar Pintado-Recarte
1,2,3,
Jorge C. Morales-Camino
5,
Carlos Romero-Román
5,
Concepción Hernández-Martin
1,2,3,
Coral Bravo
1,2,3,
Julia Bujan
6,7,
Melchor Alvarez-Mon
6,7,8,
Miguel A. Ortega
6,7,* and
Juan De León-Luis
1,2,3
1
Department of Public and Maternal and Child Health, School of Medicine, Complutense University of Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain
2
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Gregorio Marañón, 28009 Madrid, Spain
3
Health Research Institute Gregorio Marañón, Unidad de Investigación Materno Infantile Familia Alonso (UDIMFFA), 28009 Madrid, Spain
4
Department of Obstetrics, Prenatal Diagnosis, Miguel Servet University Hospital, 50009 Zaragoza, Spain
5
Laboratory of Clinical Biochemistry, Albacete Hospital, 02006 Albacete, Spain
6
Ramón y Cajal Institute of Healthcare Research (IRYCIS), 28034 Madrid, Spain
7
Department of Medicine and Medical Specialties, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Alcalá, Alcalá de Henares, 28801 Madrid, Spain
8
Immune System Diseases-Rheumatology and Internal Medicine Service, Center for Biomedical Research Network for Liver and Digestive Diseases (CIBEREHD), University Hospital Príncipe de Asturias, Alcalá de Henares, 28801 Madrid, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Medicina 2022, 58(2), 178; https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina58020178
Submission received: 15 December 2021 / Revised: 20 January 2022 / Accepted: 21 January 2022 / Published: 25 January 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Diagnosis, Evaluation, and Management of Diseases during Pregnancy)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Background and Objectives: Fetal growth restriction (FGR) is a severe obstetric disease characterized by a low fetal size entailing a set of undesired consequences. For instance, previous studies have noticed a worrisome association between FGR with an abnormal neurodevelopment. However, the precise link between FGR and neurodevelopmental alterations are not yet fully understood yet. Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) is a critical neurotrophin strongly implicated in neurodevelopmental and other neurological processes. In addition, serum levels of BDNF appears to be an interesting indicator of pathological pregnancies, being correlated with the neonatal brain levels. Therefore, the aim of this study is to analyze the blood levels of BDNF in the cord blood from fetuses with FGR in comparison to those with weight appropriate for gestational age (AGA). Materials and Methods: In this study, 130 subjects were recruited: 91 in group A (AGA fetuses); 39 in group B (16 FGR fetuses with exclusively middle cerebral artery (MCA) pulsatility index (PI) < 5th percentile and 23 with umbilical artery (UA) PI > 95th percentile). Serum levels of BDNF were determined through ELISA reactions in these groups. Results: Our results show a significant decrease in cord blood levels of BDNF in FGR and more prominently in those with UA PI >95th percentile in comparison to AGA. FGR fetuses with exclusively decreased MCA PI below the 5th percentile also show reduced levels of BDNF than AGA, although this difference was not statistically significant. Conclusions: Overall, our study reports a potential pathophysiological link between reduced levels of BDNF and neurodevelopmental alterations in fetuses with FGR. However, further studies should be conducted in those FGR subjects with MCA PI < 5th percentile in order to understand the possible implications of BDNF in this group.

1. Introduction

Fetal growth restriction (FGR) is a severe complication in pregnancy. It monopolizes great resources of maternal fetal research, and though clearly stated in some guidelines [1], inconsistency in terminology and definition hampers interpretation and comparison of studies. Some define fetal growth as a statistical definition of fetal size below a certain centile, referring to different thresholds for diagnosis. This also adds the possibility of including normally grown fetuses as growth restricted as well as the opposite, as it is difficult to predict the growth potential of a certain fetus [2]. The relationship between FGR and abnormal neurodevelopment has been reflected in numerous studies where the prenatal influence of poor growth on motor and executive functions in children has been explored [3,4]. Antenatal surveillance of growth-restricted fetuses is based, amongst others, on Doppler assessment [1]. The progression of FGR has been previously described and undergoes several hemodynamic phases, passing through a decrease in the estimated fetal weight centile below 10, followed by decreased pulsatility index (PI) in MCA and later, an elevation of the umbilical PI until reaching the final phase that is the alteration of the ductus venosus [5]. These stages have been related to postnatal neurodevelopment [6]. A condition deserving a highlight is the fetal Doppler adaptation to growth restriction named “brain sparing”. This phenomenon of cerebral vasodilation has been interpreted as an adaptive mechanism, but more recent studies associate it with poor results in later neurodevelopment and reviews have stated poor cognitive function and lower IQ scores [7,8].
The etiology of the neurodevelopmental alterations in FGR is not completely known. It is based on abnormal feto–maternal exchange and fetal hypoxia because of a chronic decrease in umbilical flow due to placental insufficiency [9]. Oxidative stress, neurotoxicity, apoptotic degeneration and microglial-mediated neuroinflammation are the main mechanisms related to brain injury in these fetuses [10,11,12].
On account of the difficulty of accessing the human brain in vivo, studies focused on various animal models of hypoxia have attempted to identify these intermediate mechanisms, studying neuronal growth, proliferation and survival after injury [13], the different modifications depending on the brain area studied and the severity of the growth restriction [14]. Furthermore, initial investigations on non-invasive human proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy have been ignited, showing higher lactate peaks on severely growth restricted fetal brains [15] and on not so severely restricted fetuses, as in the Sanz-Cortes study where late FGR and small for gestational age fetuses showed lower N-acetylaspartate to choline ratios, attributable to either a delay in maturational processes or to neuronal injury [16].
Other in vivo studies have tried to identify those intermediate steps centered on proteins with an important role on prenatal neurodevelopment, such as reelin on fetuses with FGR [17]. These studies try to find objective and reproductive data, easy to obtain as cord blood, to set associations to prenatal conditions, such as FGR.
Although many molecules have been described as neurotrophic biomarkers, playing important roles in neurodevelopment, neurotrophins are one of the most important actors in brain development. They are involved in neuronal differentiation and synaptic plasticity, also playing a central role in neuronal survival. Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) is one of the most studied neurotrophins and it is closely related to neuroinflammation through its role as a modulator of neuroglia [18]. In animal models of intrauterine growth restriction, it has been widely seen that BDNF is decreased especially in the hippocampus [19,20], which is the brain region with the main expression of this neurotrophin, enhancing neuronal plasticity and relating it to memory and learning [11]. Furthermore, in vivo models have shown that the lack of microglia after cerebral ischemia increases cytokine levels, findings consistent with the protective role of microglia in the removal of waste products that indirectly relates BDNF to neuroinflammation and neuroplasticity [21].
BDNF alterations in neonates have also been studied as indicators of FGR, infection, pre-eclampsia [22], hours of rupture of membranes, corticosteroid maturation and magnesium sulfate treatment [23,24]. The largest study to date, related low levels of BDNF in dry blood tests (blood spots) taken on the first day of life in newborns with intrauterine growth restriction [25]. Furthermore, there are studies that link lower levels of BDNF with neonatal periventricular hemorrhage secondary to hypoxic-ischemic lesions [26]. Likewise, as a therapeutic approach, BDNF is being studied for neuroprotection, reducing cell apoptosis in the face of external insults, promoting specific populations of neurons in both central and peripheral nervous systems as well as after hypoxic or inflammatory brain injuries [27,28,29]. On the other hand, since the origin of neonatal BDNF in cord blood is believed to be a reflection of brain levels in animal studies [30], there are publications in the medical literature that assess BDNF levels as a predictor of behavior diseases [31] and its role in major depression, autism spectrum disorders and degenerative diseases [32,33].
Hence, due to the important role of BDNF in neurodevelopment as well as the extensive published literature on the influence of prenatal variables on their levels in newborns, this neurotrophin is a candidate for the study of intermediate processes that may relate to the prenatal insult reflected as restricted intrauterine growth and impaired postnatal neurodevelopment. Therefore, this study focuses on BDNF behavior from FGR fetuses cord blood compared to fetuses with weight appropriate for gestational age (AGA).

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Patients Selection and Fetal Growing Assessment

Pregnant patients were prospectively recruited during their visit at the Maternity Unit of the Gregorio Marañón University Hospital. These pregnancies were dated using the cranio–caudal length at their first trimester ultrasound. Cases were selected after estimating fetal weight (EFW) by ultrasound using the Hadlock 4 formula and plotting the EFW on our own population reference tables. When the EFW was below the 10th percentile, in accordance with the ISUOG FGR criteria [1], a Doppler study was performed, assessing the pulsatility index of the umbilical artery (UA PI), the PI of the middle cerebral artery (MCA PI) and the mean PI of the uterine arteries (UtA PI) according to Ciobanu [34] and Gomez [35] reference charts, respectively, with a maximum of 7 days prior to delivery. In fetuses with adequate for gestational age weight, a Doppler study was not performed. The birth weight was obtained at the delivery room for all fetuses except for 9 FGR who were weighed within the first 12 h at the neonatal intensive care unit. Birth weights were plotted to our neonatal birth weight reference. Exclusion criteria were fetus with known congenital anomalies diagnosed prenatally or immediately postnatally, including genetic conditions, clinical chorioamnionitis, use of illicit drugs or alcohol during pregnancy or poor gestational control defined as first appointment beyond first trimester or less than 4 visits to the clinic [36]. Maternal data were withdrawn from the medical records during hospital stays, such as for preeclampsia.
To carry out the BDNF nálisis according to FGR severity, the study subjects were divided in two groups. Group A contained fetuses with weight appropriate for gestational age (AGA) birth weight ≥ 10th percentile. Group B was made up of FGR fetuses (birth weight < 10th percentile) with abnormal umbilical or cerebral Doppler study. Further detailed Doppler assessment in FGR fetuses was performed in order to assess the effect of brain vasodilation on BDNF levels. For that reason, we divided group B into two subgroups: fetuses with decreased MCA PI < 5th percentile and fetuses with increased UA PI > 95th percentile in order to assess the effect of cerebral vasodilation on BDNF levels.

2.2. Sample Collection, Initial Processing and Storage

Samples were collected at the time of delivery, prior to placenta evacuation and deposited into standard clinical tubes containing lithium heparin. The blood was centrifuged within the first hour of birth at the Biochemistry department, by the on-call laboratory technicians. Eppenddorf aliquots, a minimum of one and a maximum of three, coded with the study identifier were stored in racks in a Thermo Scientific Fisher Forma freezer at −86 °C. Thawing was carried out at room temperature and on only one occasion, no subsequent freezing was performed.

2.3. Determination of BDNF in Umbilical Vein by ELISA Methodology

BDNF determination was achieved by the Quantikine Human BDNF Immunoassay assay (R&D Systems) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. This is a sandwich-type solid phase ELISA. Anti-BDNF antibodies are immobilized on the surface of the wells of the microplate. These antibodies capture the BDNF contained in the samples, controls and calibrators and after washing a second antiBDNF, peroxidase enzyme-conjugated antibody is added, leading to a colorimetric reaction by adding the substrate (3, 3′, 5, 5′-Tetramethylbenzidine), emitting a signal proportional to the BDNF concentration. The absorbance of each sample is read spectrophotometrically at a wavelength of 450 nm. Generation of a standard curve allows for identification of the protein concentration. The intra assay and inter assay coefficients of variation for the ELISA were 5 and 9, respectively. All samples were assayed in duplicate.

2.4. Statistical Analysys

For the statistical analysis, IBM SPSS Statistics V21.0 was used. Differences between the groups of study were assessed using chi-square or non-parametric Mann-Whitney test, based on the normal distribution of the variables in these different groups. When assessing the influence of FGR on BDNF levels a multivariable linear regression model was performed in order to adjust for fetal variables.

3. Results

Our sample consisted of 130 subjects: 91 in group A (AGA fetuses); 39 in group B (16 FGR fetuses with MCA PI < 5th percentile and 23 with UA PI > 95th percentile). Fetal Doppler measurement was performed a mean of 3 days before delivery.
Obstetric and neonatal characteristics of the two groups are shown in Table 1. The characteristics surrogated to severity of FGR, such as cesarean section, admission to neonatal care unit and intraventricular hemorrhage were higher in group B. Birth weight, weight centile and gestational age were higher in group A compared to group B. Other variables, such as preeclampsia and increased PI UtA, also had different frequencies. Conversely, inflammatory markers were controlled by leukocytosis and there were no significant differences observed.
The FGR group had 41% of fetuses who required corticosteroids for lung maturation and 23% neuroprotection with MgSO4 due to prematurity. The four cases of intraventricular hemorrhage diagnosed during admission to neonatal care were limited to the germinal matrix.
Figure 1 shows the BDNF values according to the groups under study. We found significant BDNF differences between medians in groups with non-parametric U Mann–Whitney test (p = 0.002). As fetuses with impaired growth were more likely to be preterm, we adjusted for gestational age to see the stability of the association with a linear regression (p = 0.034).
Subgroup analysis to assess the effect of decreased MCA PI on BDNF was performed. Clinical characteristics and differences between both groups are shown in Table 2. BDNF levels showed a downward trend, but no differences were found. AGA fetuses and FGR fetuses with decreased MCA PI showed similar BDNF levels. Within FGR fetuses, no differences were found between fetuses with decreased MCA PI and FGR fetuses with UA PI >95th percentile (Figure 2).

4. Discussion

So far, this study is the first to demonstrate a decrease in BDNF on FGR fetuses with a fetal Doppler alteration. This difference was mainly due to the low BDNF levels in the subgroup of fetuses most severely affected with an increased umbilical Doppler PI, as it is shown in Figure 2. BDNF concentration in FGR fetuses with decreased MCA PI exclusively did not differ from the other fetuses, either AGA or FGR, with UA PI > 95th percentile. Perinatal variables from FGR fetuses were different from AGA in those variables subrogated to the growth restriction environment. Preeclampsia and increased uterine artery PI are risk factors for growth restriction due to impaired placentation, and prematurity is common amongst those fetuses as the optimal time of delivery is still under discussion [37]. This explains why perinatal variables linked to gestational age, such as lung maturation and neuroprotection with MgSO4 as well as preeclampsia rate and pathological UtA PI linked to impaired placentation, were more likely on FGR group. Other variables also linked to either prematurity and FGR, such as intraventricular hemorrhage, cesarean section rate and neonatal care admission, were more frequent in the FGR group.
Studies in humans have also demonstrated decreased levels of BDNF in FGR fetuses [25,38,39], regardless of adaptive fetal Doppler status. However, not all studies are consistent with our findings. Malamitsi-Putchner observed there were no differences in BDNF between growth-restricted and adequate newborns [40]. These study groups had no differences in fetal Doppler; in fact, it was a recommendation that they carried out future studies. Other studies from the same group evaluated fetal BDNF behavior in diabetic mothers, seeing that the levels were lower than the healthy controls in the latter, regardless of the FGR degree they had [38]. A decreased neonatal BDNF level in diabetic mothers has been observed [41,42], and this effect could mask the one caused by the growth defect since it was diagnosed by a birth weight centile lower than 5 exclusively without Doppler evaluation. Another recent study found no differences between very low birth weight FGR and very low birth weight AGA fetuses when assessing trophic biomarkers as BDNF or vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). FGR criteria was again only a birth centile threshold of 10th centile [43] without any examination of Doppler status. Paradoxically, these groups had no birth weight differences. With this in mind, our study cohort had strict selection criteria, besides a birth weight centile classification for FGR condition; we also applied Doppler criteria, either umbilical or cerebral. This condition ensures a sample where healthy fetuses that are small for gestational age are not included, thereby overcoming one of the difficulties in the design of FGR studies.
Besides a rigorous selection of FGR fetuses, these studies have to deal with confounding factors. Brain injury is sometimes overcome by prematurity in severe FGR; for that reason, an adjustment for gestational age is advised. In our study, the association of the severity of growth restriction with decreased BDNF persisted after adjustment for gestational age. Another study from our group observed on healthy term newborns that BDNF cord blood levels decrease as gestational age at delivery increases (unpublished data). This fact would also confirm a low BDNF on FGR despite its lower gestational age. In order to cope with the prematurity confounding factor, Antonakopoulos et al. performed a BDNF analysis on amniotic fluid on ongoing pregnancies. They found higher levels of BDNF on amniotic fluid from small for gestational age (SGA) fetuses assessed early in the second trimester. They did not study Doppler nor fetal growth status at the time of amniocentesis as it was performed for other reasons, finding BDNF levels on large for gestational age and SGA fetuses [44].
Another factor to consider is the treatment with corticoids, as it has been related to high BDNF levels [23]. In our study, the FGR group had a higher proportion of antenatal steroids for lung maturation (41%) but despite that fact, this group had the lowest concentrations still after gestational age adjustment.
FGR fetuses have a described mechanism of adaptation to preserve important body functions called “brain sparing”. In general, it has been observed that brain vasodilation is associated with lower scores on cognitive neurodevelopmental scales at 2 years [45]; however, regarding motor alterations or low scores on early scales, no differences have been seen when comparing to newborns without brain redistribution. This probably reflects cognitive alteration rather than motor function, as attributed to the frontal cortex [7]. Regarding our fetuses with decreased MCA PI exclusively, we noted the finding of a decrease in BDNF concentration although this was not statistically significant, especially after gestational age adjustment. When the target is set to study the consequences of “brain sparing”, early and late FGR is an important factor as many of these fetuses with late onset FGR will have a slower clinical progression and might be more likely to reach term [6]. Studies with larger numbers should focus on this group of patients and long-term neurodevelopment assessment is encouraged in matched case-control studies.
However, our study has some limitations, not only in the number recruited, but also the possible confusion in the face of variables associated with the severity of FGR. Ventricular hemorrhage occurred, although it was limited to germinal matrix, and intraventricular hemorrhage can be associated with lower levels of BDNF [26]. Although we controlled for prenatal malformations, known genetic conditions at birth and infectious diseases, one of the variables that has been observed to modulate BDNF expression is maternal obesity and we lacked this data [41]. Moreover, we did not perform Doppler exam on AGA fetuses; this group might include fetuses who did not reach their growth potential, although the interquartile range was from 43 to 88. Regarding prematurity, we tried to overcome this bias through linear regression and gestational age adjustment. This handicap is present in many studies focused on FGR. Assessing brain development, neurotrophic factors and postnatal neurodevelopment with age matched controlled studies is of paramount importance but also difficult to achieve as growth restriction is linked to prematurity and healthy preterm fetuses are difficult to identify [37].
Even considering these BDNF differences in FGR, due to the fundamental role of this neurotrophin in prenatal neurodevelopment, our study lacks postnatal follow-up. Future studies of BDNF levels on growth restricted fetuses and linking to the evaluation of subsequent neurodevelopment are necessary to elucidate the intermediate mechanisms that cause such postnatal alteration. These should also serve to identify individuals at increased neurological risk and assess future intervention actions as it has already been studied in hypoxic brain injuries in postnatal Noxa [46].

5. Conclusions

We have observed a significant decrease in cord blood BDNF in FGR with Doppler alteration compared to AGA fetuses. This difference was greater between AGA and FGR fetuses with UA PI > 95th percentile. Decreased MCA PI in FGR fetuses needs further study as we could not find statistical differences on BDNF cord blood concentration when compared to AGA fetuses, although lower levels were observed.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.P.-M., P.P.-R. and J.D.L.-L.; methodology, J.P.-M., M.A.-M., M.A.O. and J.D.L.-L.; software, J.P.-M. and C.R.-R.; validation, M.A.-M. and J.D.L.-L.; formal analysis, J.P.-M.; investigation, J.P.-M., P.P.-R., J.C.M.-C., C.R.-R., C.H.-M., C.B., J.B., M.A.-M., M.A.O. and J.D.L.-L.; resources, J.P.-M., M.A.-M. and J.D.L.-L.; data curation, J.P.-M., M.A.O. and J.D.L.-L.; writing—original draft preparation, J.P.-M., P.P.-R., J.C.M.-C., C.R.-R., C.H.-M., C.B., J.B., M.A.-M., M.A.O. and J.D.L.-L.; writing—review and editing, J.P.-M., P.P.-R., J.C.M.-C., C.R.-R., C.H.-M., C.B., J.B., M.A.-M., M.A.O. and J.D.L.-L.; visualization, J.B., M.A.-M. and J.D.L.-L.; supervision, M.A.-M. and J.D.L.-L.; project administration, J.B., M.A.-M. and J.D.L.-L.; funding acquisition, J.B., M.A.-M. and J.D.L.-L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study (FIS-PI18/00912) has been supported by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (Plan Estatal de I + D + i 2013–2016) and co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund “A Road to Europe” (ERDF) and B2017/BMD-3804 MITIC-CM and Halekulani S.L. and Maternal-fetal medicine research grant (Santiago Dexeus Font Foundation).

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Institutional Review Board of Clinical Research Ethics Committee 28 May 2009 (89/09).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The data used to support the findings of the present study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Lees, C.C.; Stampalija, T.; Baschata, A.A.; Da Silva Costa, F.; Ferrazzi, E.; Figueras, F.; Hecher, K.; Kingdom, J.; Poon, L.C.; Salomon, L.J.; et al. ISUOG Practice Guidelines: Diagnosis and management of small-for-gestational-age fetus and fetal growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2020, 56, 298–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Gordijn, S.J.; Beune, I.M.; Ganzevoort, W. Building consensus and standards in fetal growth restriction studies. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Obstet. Gynaecol. 2018, 49, 117–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Sacchi, C.; Marino, C.; Nosarti, C.; Vieno, A.; Visentin, S.; Simonelli, A. Association of Intrauterine Growth Restriction and Small for Gestational Age Status with Childhood Cognitive Outcomes. JAMA Pediatr. 2020, 174, 772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Arcangeli, T.; Thilaganathan, B.; Hooper, R.; Khan, K.S.; Bhide, A. Neurodevelopmental delay in small babies at term: A systematic review. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2012, 40, 267–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Baschat, A.A.; Gembruch, U.; Harman, C.R. The sequence of changes in Doppler and biophysical parameters as severe fetal growth restriction worsens. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2001, 18, 571–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Baschat, A.A. Neurodevelopment after Fetal Growth Restriction. Fetal Diagn. Ther. 2014, 36, 136–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Meher, S.; Hernandez-Andrade, E.; Basheer, S.N.; Lees, C. Impact of cerebral redistribution on neurodevelopmental outcome in small for gestational age or growth restricted babies: A systematic review. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2015, 46, 398–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Benítez-Marín, M.J.; Marín-Clavijo, J.; Blanco-Elena, J.A.; Jiménez-López, J.; González-Mesa, E. Brain Sparing Effect on Neurodevelopment in Children with Intrauterine Growth Restriction: A Systematic Review. Children 2021, 8, 745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Baschat, A.A. Neurodevelopment following fetal growth restriction and its relationship with antepartum parameters of placental dysfunction. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2011, 37, 501–514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Rees, S.; Harding, R.; Walker, D. The biological basis of injury and neuroprotection in the fetal and neonatal brain. Int. J. Dev. Neurosci. 2011, 29, 551–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Basilious, A.; Yager, J.; Fehlings, M.G. Neurological outcomes of animal models of uterine artery ligation and relevance to human intrauterine growth restriction: A systematic review. Dev. Med. Child Neurol. 2015, 57, 420–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  12. Wixey, J.A.; Chand, K.K.; Colditz, P.B.; Bjorkman, S.T. Review: Neuroinflammation in intrauterine growth restriction. Placenta 2017, 54, 117–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  13. Koehler, R.C.; Yang, Z.-J.; Lee, J.K.; Martin, L.J. Perinatal hypoxic-ischemic brain injury in large animal models: Relevance to human neonatal encephalopathy. J. Cereb. Blood Flow Metab. 2018, 38, 2092–2111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Ruff, C.A.; Faulkner, S.D.; Rumajogee, P.; Beldick, S.; Foltz, W.; Corrigan, J.; Basilious, A.; Jiang, S.; Thiyagalingam, S.; Yager, J.Y.; et al. The extent of intrauterine growth restriction determines the severity of cerebral injury and neurobehavioural deficits in rodents. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0184653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  15. Cetin, I.; Barberis, B.; Brusati, V.; Brighina, E.; Mandia, L.; Arighi, A.; Radaelli, T.; Biondetti, P.; Bresolin, N.; Pardi, G.; et al. Lactate detection in the brain of growth-restricted fetuses with magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2011, 205, 350.e1–350.e7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Sanz-Cortés, M.; Simoes, R.V.; Bargalló, N.; Masoller, N.; Figueras, F.; Gratacos, E. Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy assessment of fetal brain metabolism in late-onset ‘small for gestational age’ versus “intrauterine growth restriction” fetuses. Fetal Diagn. Ther. 2014, 37, 108–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Pascual Mancho, J.; Pintado-Recarte, P.; Romero-Román, C.; Morales-Camino, J.C.; Hernández-Martin, C.; Bujan, J.; Ortega, M.A.; De León-Luis, J. Influence of Cerebral Vasodilation on Blood Reelin Levels in Growth Restricted Fetuses. Diagnostics 2021, 11, 1036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Giacobbo, B.L.; Doorduin, J.; Klein, H.C.; Dierckx, R.A.J.O.; Bromberg, E.; Vries, E.F.J. Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor in Brain Disorders: Focus on Neuroinflammation. Mol. Neurobiol. 2019, 56, 3295–3312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Ninomiya, M.; Numakawa, T.; Adachi, N.; Furuta, M.; Chiba, S.; Richards, M.; Shibata, S.; Kunugi, H. Cortical neurons from intrauterine growth retardation rats exhibit lower response to neurotrophin BDNF. Neurosci. Lett. 2010, 476, 104–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Coupé, B.; Dutriez-Casteloot, I.; Breton, C.; Lefèvre, F.; Mairesse, J.; Dickes-Coopman, A.; Silhol, M.; Tapia-Arancibia, L.; Lesage, J.; Vieau, D. Perinatal undernutrition modifies cell proliferation and brain-derived neurotrophic factor levels during critical time-windows for hypothalamic and hippocampal development in the male rat. J. Neuroendocrinol. 2009, 21, 40–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Calabrese, F.; Rossetti, A.C.; Racagni, G.; Gass, P.; Riva, M.A.; Molteni, R. Brain-derived neurotrophic factor: A bridge between inflammation and neuroplasticity. Front. Cell. Neurosci. 2014, 8, 430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. D’Souza, V.A.; Kilari, A.S.; Joshi, A.A.; Mehendale, S.S.; Pisal, H.M.; Joshi, S.R. Differential regulation of brain-derived neurotrophic factor in term and preterm preeclampsia. Reprod. Sci. 2014, 21, 230–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Rao, R.; Mashburn, C.B.; Mao, J.; Wadhwa, N.; Smith, G.M.; Desai, N.S. Brain-derived neurotrophic factor in infants. Pediatr. Res. 2009, 65, 548–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  24. Bachnas, M.A.; Mose, J.C.; Effendi, J.S.; Andonotopo, W. Influence of antenatal magnesium sulfate application on cord blood levels of brain-derived neurotrophic factor in premature infants. J. Perinat. Med. 2014, 42, 129–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Leviton, A.; Allred, E.N.; Yamamoto, H.; Fichorova, R.N.; Kuban, K.; O’Shea, T.M.; Dammann, O.; ELGAN Study Investigators. Antecedents and correlates of blood concentrations of neurotrophic growth factors in very preterm newborns. Cytokine 2017, 94, 21–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Chouthai, N.S.; Sampers, J.; Desai, N.; Smith, G.M. Changes in Neurotrophin Levels in Umbilical Cord Blood from Infants with Different Gestational Ages and Clinical Conditions. Pediatr. Res. 2003, 53, 965–969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Harris, N.M.; Ritzel, R.; Mancini, N.S.; Jiang, Y.; Yi, X.; Manickam, D.S.; Banks, W.A.; Kabanov, A.V.; McCullough, L.D.; Verma, R. Nano-particle delivery of brain derived neurotrophic factor after focal cerebral ischemia reduces tissue injury and enhances behavioral recovery. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav. 2016, 150, 48–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Chen, H.; Dang, Y.; Liu, X.; Ren, J.; Wang, H. Exogenous brain-derived neurotrophic factor attenuates neuronal apoptosis and neurological deficits after subarachnoid hemorrhage in rats. Exp. Ther. Med. 2019, 18, 3837–3844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Husson, I.; Rangon, C.-M.; Lelièvre, V.; Bemelmans, A.-P.; Sachs, P.; Mallet, J.; Kosofsky, B.E.; Gressens, P. BDNF-induced white matter neuroprotection and stage-dependent neuronal survival following a neonatal excitotoxic challenge. Cereb. Cortex 2005, 15, 250–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Karege, F.; Schwald, M.; Cisse, M. Postnatal developmental profile of brain-derived neurotrophic factor in rat brain and platelets. Neurosci. Lett. 2002, 328, 261–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Ghassabian, A.; Sundaram, R.; Chahal, N.; McLain, A.C.; Bell, E.; Lawrence, D.A.; Yeung, E.H. Determinants of neonatal brain-derived neurotrophic factor and association with child development. Dev. Psychopathol. 2017, 29, 1499–1511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Chen, S.; Jiang, H.; Liu, Y.; Hou, Z.; Yue, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Zhao, F.; Xu, Z.; Li, Y.; Mou, X.; et al. Combined serum levels of multiple proteins in tPA-BDNF pathway may. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 6871. [Google Scholar]
  33. Adachi, N. New insight in expression, transport, and secretion of brain-derived neurotrophic factor: Implications in brain-related diseases. WJBC 2014, 5, 409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Ciobanu, A.; Wright, A.; Syngelaki, A.; Wright, D.; Akolekar, R.; Nicolaides, K.H. Fetal Medicine Foundation reference ranges for umbilical artery and middle cerebral artery pulsatility index and cerebroplacental ratio. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2019, 53, 465–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Gómez, O.; Figueras, F.; Fernández, S.; Bennasar, M.; Martínez, J.M.; Puerto, B.; Gratacós, E. Reference ranges for uterine artery mean pulsatility index at 11–41 weeks of gestation. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2008, 32, 128–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Grupo de trabajo de la Guia de práctica clñinica de atención en el embarazo y puerperio, Ministerio de Sanidad, Servicios Sociales e Igualdad. Agencia de Evaluación de Tecnologías Sanitarias de Andalucía 2014. Guías de Práctica Clínica en el SNS. AETSA 2011/10. 2014, pp. 1–494. Available online: https://portal.guiasalud.es/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/GPC_533_Embarazo_AETSA_compl.pdf (accessed on 14 December 2021).
  37. Fleiss, B. Knowledge Gaps and Emerging Research Areas in Intrauterine Growth Restriction-Associated Brain Injury. Front. Endocrinol. 2019, 10, 188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Briana, D.D.; Papastavrou, M.; Boutsikou, M.; Marmarinos, A.; Gourgiotis, D.; Malamitsi-Puchner, A. Differential expression of cord blood neurotrophins in gestational diabetes: The impact of fetal growth abnormalities. J. Matern. Fetal Neonatal Med. 2018, 31, 278–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Matoba, N.; Ouyang, F.; Mestan, K.K.L.; Porta, N.F.M.; Pearson, C.M.; Ortiz, K.M.; Bauchner, H.C.; Zuckerman, B.S.; Wang, X. Cord blood immune biomarkers in small for gestational age births. J. Dev. Orig. Health Dis. 2011, 2, 89–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Malamitsi-Puchner, A.; Nikolaou, K.E.; Economou, E.; Boutsikou, M.; Boutsikou, T.; Kyriakakou, M.; Puchner, K.; Hassiakos, D. Intrauterine growth restriction and circulating neurotrophin levels at term. Early Hum. Dev. 2007, 83, 465–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Prince, C.S.; Maloyan, A.; Myatt, L. Maternal obesity alters brain derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) signaling in the placenta in a sexually dimorphic manner. Placenta 2017, 49, 55–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Su, C.-H.; Liu, T.-Y.; Chen, I.T.; Ou-Yang, M.-C.; Huang, L.-T.; Tsai, C.-C.; Chen, C.-C. Correlations between serum BDNF levels and neurodevelopmental outcomes in infants of mothers with gestational diabetes. Pediatr. Neonatol. 2021, 62, 298–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Yue, S.L.; Eke, A.C.; Vaidya, D.; Northington, F.J.; Everett, A.D.; Graham, E.M. Perinatal blood biomarkers for the identification of brain injury in very low birth weight growth-restricted infants. J. Perinatol. 2021, 41, 2252–2260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Antonakopoulos, N.; Iliodromiti, Z.; Mastorakos, G.; Iavazzo, C.; Valsamakis, G.; Salakos, N.; Papageorghiou, A.; Margeli, A.; Kalantaridou, S.; Creatsas, G.; et al. Association between Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor (BDNF) Levels in 2nd Trimester Amniotic Fluid and Fetal Development. Mediat. Inflamm. 2018, 2018, 8476217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  45. Eixarch, E.; Meler, E.; Iraola, A.; Illa, M.; Crispi, F.; Hernandez-Andrade, E.; Gratacos, E.; Figueras, F. Neurodevelopmental outcome in 2-year-old infants who were small-for-gestational age term fetuses with cerebral blood flow redistribution. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2008, 32, 894–899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Novak, I. Emergent Prophylactic, Reparative and Restorative Brain Interventions for Infants Born Preterm with Cerebral Palsy. Front. Physiol. 2019, 10, 15. [Google Scholar]
Medicina 58 00178 g001 550
Figure 1. BDNF Box plot across study groups. p * is adjusted for gestational age with linear regression.
Figure 1. BDNF Box plot across study groups. p * is adjusted for gestational age with linear regression.
Medicina 58 00178 g001
Medicina 58 00178 g002 550
Figure 2. BDNF Box plot with subgroup of fetuses with brain sparing. p adjusted for gestational age with linear regression.
Figure 2. BDNF Box plot with subgroup of fetuses with brain sparing. p adjusted for gestational age with linear regression.
Medicina 58 00178 g002
Table
Table 1. Bivariate analysis of maternal and neonatal clinical characteristics of the study groups.
Table 1. Bivariate analysis of maternal and neonatal clinical characteristics of the study groups.
GROUP A
AGA
N = 91		GROUP B
FGR
N = 39		p
Maternal age (years) M (IQR)32 (7)34 (5)NS
Gestational age (weeks) M (IQR)38 (4)35 (5)<0.001
Fetal sex (female) n (%)49 (54)15 (38)NS
MgSO4 n (%)09 (23)<0.001
Lung maturation n (%)1 (1)16 (41)<0.001
Cesarean section n (%)11 (12)25 (64)<0.001
UtA PI > p95 n (%)N/A18 (46)N/A
Preeclampsia n (%)1 (1)6 (15)0.005
Birth weight (g) M (IQR)3290 (650)1750 (870)<0.001
Weight centile M (IQR)65 (45)0 (1)<0.001
pH AU M (IQR)7.29 (0.11)7.26 (0.09)NS
Cord blood leukocytes (number/uL) M (IQR)15,600 (6500)12,700 (7500)NS
Neonatal care admission n (%)6 (6.6)25 (64)<0.001
Intraventricular hemorrhage n (%)04 (10)0.007
BDNF (pg/mL) M (IQR)6980 (3735)4838 (4724)0.001
AGA: adequate for gestational age weight. FGR: fetal growth restriction; UtA PI: uterine artery pulsatility index PROM: premature rupture of membranes; IQR: interquartile range; M: median; NS: no significative. N/A: not applicable.
Table
Table 2. Bivariate analysis of maternal and perinatal features between clinical subgroups.
Table 2. Bivariate analysis of maternal and perinatal features between clinical subgroups.
AGA
N = 91		FGR with MCA PI < 5th Exclusively
N = 16		p
Maternal age (years) M (SD)32 (28–35)34 (31–35)NS
Gestational age (weeks) M (IQR)38 (36–40)36 (35–38)0.027
Fetal sex (female) n (%)49 (54)9 (56)NS
MgSO4 n (%)03 (19)0.003
Lung maturation n (%)1 (1)3 (19)0.01
Cesarean section n (%)11 (12)10 (63)<0.001
UtA PI > p95 n (%)N/A4 (25)N/A
Preeclampsia n (%)1 (1.3)4 (25)NS
Birth weight (g) m (SD)3302 (442)2069 (412)<0.001
Weight centile M (IQR)65 (43–88)1 (1–3)<0.001
pH AU M (IQR)7.29 (0.11)7.27 (0.08)NS
Cord blood leukocytes (number/uL) M (IQR)15,600 (6500)14,700 (7225)NS
Neonatal care admission n (%)6 (6.6)6 (37.5)0.002
Intraventricular hemorrhage n (%)00NS
BDNF (pg/mL) m (SD)6980 (3735)6268 (3539)NS
PROM: premature rupture of membranes; AGA: adequate for gestational age weight. IQR: interquartile range; SD: standard deviation. NS: no significative. N/A: not applicable.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Pascual-Mancho, J.; Pintado-Recarte, P.; Morales-Camino, J.C.; Romero-Román, C.; Hernández-Martin, C.; Bravo, C.; Bujan, J.; Alvarez-Mon, M.; Ortega, M.A.; De León-Luis, J. Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor Levels in Cord Blood from Growth Restricted Fetuses with Doppler Alteration Compared to Adequate for Gestational Age Fetuses. Medicina 2022, 58, 178. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina58020178

AMA Style

Pascual-Mancho J, Pintado-Recarte P, Morales-Camino JC, Romero-Román C, Hernández-Martin C, Bravo C, Bujan J, Alvarez-Mon M, Ortega MA, De León-Luis J. Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor Levels in Cord Blood from Growth Restricted Fetuses with Doppler Alteration Compared to Adequate for Gestational Age Fetuses. Medicina. 2022; 58(2):178. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina58020178

Chicago/Turabian Style

Pascual-Mancho, Jara, Pilar Pintado-Recarte, Jorge C. Morales-Camino, Carlos Romero-Román, Concepción Hernández-Martin, Coral Bravo, Julia Bujan, Melchor Alvarez-Mon, Miguel A. Ortega, and Juan De León-Luis. 2022. "Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor Levels in Cord Blood from Growth Restricted Fetuses with Doppler Alteration Compared to Adequate for Gestational Age Fetuses" Medicina 58, no. 2: 178. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina58020178

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop