SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.37 número2El papel del resveratrol sobre el estrés oxidante inducido por metales pesadosAlimentos para usos médicos especiales en la Unión Europea: una actualización legislativa incompleta índice de autoresíndice de materiabúsqueda de artículos
Home Pagelista alfabética de revistas  

Servicios Personalizados

Revista

Articulo

Indicadores

Links relacionados

  • En proceso de indezaciónCitado por Google
  • No hay articulos similaresSimilares en SciELO
  • En proceso de indezaciónSimilares en Google

Compartir


Nutrición Hospitalaria

versión On-line ISSN 1699-5198versión impresa ISSN 0212-1611

Nutr. Hosp. vol.37 no.2 Madrid mar./abr. 2020  Epub 03-Ago-2020

http://dx.doi.org/10.20960/nh.02851 

Revisiones

Pregestational excess weight and adverse maternal outcomes: a systematic review of previous studies in Brazil

Exceso de peso pregestacional y resultados maternos adversos: una revisión sistemática de estudios previos en Brasil

Thelma Brandão1  , Carolina Felizardo de Moraes1  , Danielle Masterson Ferreira2  , Karina dos Santos1  , Patrícia de Carvalho Padilha1  , Cláudia Saunders1 

1Department of Nutrition and Dietetics. Instituto de Nutrição Josué de Castro. Grupo de Pesquisa em Saúde Materna e Infantil-GPSMI. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro-UFRJ. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

2Central Library. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro-UFRJ. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Abstract

Introduction:

obesity is increasing among women at reproductive age in Brazil. Excess body weight during pregnancy negatively impacts women's health.

Objectives:

to identify and analyze the publications that showed the effects of pregestational excess weight on pregnancy, delivery, and post-delivery in Brazilian women.

Methods:

this systematic review was performed including studies that involve Brazilian pregnant women with adverse outcomes caused by pregestational excess weight. Search, selection, and reporting were conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The study was conducted by manually searching and screening the databases LILACS, PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Periodicos CAPES. The selected articles were evaluated according to the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE), and categorized as studies with high (A), moderate (B), low (C), or extremely low (D) evidence quality.

Results:

a total of 1,582 studies were found, of which 39 were included for final reading and evaluation. Among these, 12.8 %, 69.2 %, and 18.0 % were classified as A, B, and C or D for evidence quality, respectively. Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, caesarean section, excessive weight gain, and gestational diabetes mellitus were commonly associated with pregestational excess weight in Brazilian women.

Conclusions:

the negative effects of excess body weight during pregnancy reflect the need for effective public policies that can address the problem, focusing on interventions that promote the health of women at reproductive age.

Keywords: Pregnancy; Overweight; Obesity; Body mass index; Systematic review

Resumen

Introducción:

la obesidad está aumentando entre las mujeres en edad reproductiva en Brasil. El exceso de peso corporal durante el embarazo afecta negativamente a la salud de las mujeres.

Objetivos:

identificar y analizar publicaciones que mostraran los efectos del exceso de peso pregestacional sobre el embarazo, el parto y el posparto en mujeres brasileñas.

Métodos:

esta revisión sistemática incluye estudios de mujeres embarazadas brasileñas con resultados adversos causados por el exceso de peso pregestacional. La búsqueda, la selección y la presentación de los resultados se realizaron de acuerdo con el sistema Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). El estudio se realizó mediante la búsqueda manual y el cribado de las bases de datos LILACS, PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane y Periódicos CAPES. Los artículos seleccionados se evaluaron de acuerdo con la calidad de la evidencia utilizando el sistema Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE), y se clasificaron como estudios de alta (A), moderada (B), baja (C) o extremadamente baja (D) calidad de la evidencia.

Resultados:

se encontraron un total de 1582 estudios, de los cuales 39 se incluyeron para su lectura final y evaluación. Entre estos, el 12,8 %, 69,2 % y 18,0 % se clasificaron como A, B y C o D en cuanto a calidad de evidencia, respectivamente. Los trastornos hipertensivos del embarazo, la cesárea, el aumento de peso excesivo y la diabetes mellitus gestacional se asociaron comúnmente con el exceso de peso pregestacional en las mujeres brasileñas.

Conclusiones:

los efectos negativos del exceso de peso corporal durante el embarazo reflejan la necesidad de políticas públicas efectivas que puedan abordar el problema, centrándose en intervenciones que promuevan la salud de las mujeres en edad reproductiva.

Palabras clave: Embarazo; Sobrepeso; Obesidad; Índice de masa corporal; Revisión sistemática

INTRODUCTION

The prevalence of excess body weight (overweight and obesity) has significantly increased worldwide, and a rapid increase has been observed in low- and medium-income countries (1). Currently, more than 50 % of women at reproductive age are overweight, and approximately a 21 % increase in the prevalence rate of obesity may be expected up to 2025 (2,3). In Brazil, 20.7 % of women are obese (4).

The incidence of excess body weight among pregnant women is considered a public health concern due to its serious short- and long-term effects on the health of women and children (5). Excess body weight might affect fertility, conception, embryogenesis, pregnancy, delivery, and post-delivery. Furthermore, maternal obesity might also promote a change in intrauterine environment due to epigenetic factors, causing obesity and its associated morbidities in the offspring (6).

Among the adverse maternal outcomes associated with excess body weight during pregnancy are gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP), genitourinary tract infections, obstructive sleep apnea, thromboembolic diseases, cholecystitis, depression, higher number of caesarean sections and instrumental deliveries (use of forceps, spatulas, and vacuum extractors), miscarriages, delivery-related complications, and issues associated with breastfeeding (7 8 9-10).

Because of the effects of overweight and obesity on the health of women, the urgency of interventions for the target group, and the growing of obesity rates in Brazil, this study aimed to identify and analysz the publications that showed the effects of pregestational excess weight on pregnancy, delivery, and post-delivery in Brazilian women, which might provide results according to the specificities of our population.

METHOD

This review was conducted from June 2016 to March 2017, and the researchers received assistance from a librarian who specializes in this study design. The recommendations found in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement (11) were used as tools to guide the elaboration, along with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) (12). Therefore, considering these criteria, the studies were classified as studies with high (A), moderate (B), low (C), or extremely low (D) evidence grade.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Observational studies and clinical trials involving pregnant women who presented with adverse outcomes caused by pregestational excess weight, and who lived within the Brazilian territory were eligible for the present study, without restrictions of language or date of publication. Editorials, non-controlled clinical trials, clinical cases, abstracts, pilot studies, systematic reviews, narratives, and deliberative conferences were excluded.

Studies involving teenagers (< 20 years), women who had multiple pregnancies, diseases prior to pregnancy, or pregnancy after bariatric surgery, and women with absence of information regarding nutritional status were excluded. Articles involving women with adverse outcomes who were breastfeeding were excluded from the final step of the study after a re-evaluation of objectives.

Self-reported or measured pregestational body weight and height were used in calculating body mass index (BMI = weight/height in meters2), with cut-off values established according to the criteria that were valid when the studies were conducted. BMI was used to identify pregestational nutritional status (8).

Thus, all adverse outcomes that represented a risk to maternal health were considered, without any previous limitations. A p-value < 0.05 and/or associated measurements with their respective 95 % or 97 % confidence intervals not comprising the value 1 were considered statistically significant.

SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND SEARCH STRATEGIES

Original articles without any restriction in terms of language or date of publication were obtained from the data bases LILACS, MEDLINE via PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus. Additional searches were conducted in the bank of theses and dissertations of Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (Periódicos CAPES).

The descriptors used for the bibliographic search were chosen using the terms in Descritores em Ciências da Saúde (DeCS), in Portuguese, and in Medical Subject Headings (MeSH), in English. Therefore, the following terms were used in the methodology: 'pregnancy', 'gestation', and 'pregnant women' and' overweight', 'obesity', 'body mass index', with their corresponding terms in Portuguese in the context 'Brasil' or 'Brazil', with Boolean operators OR and AND used for word connection.

The controlled vocabulary (MeSH terms) and free terms in the search strategies were defined according to the PECOS system, where population (P) refers to Brazilian adult pregnant women, exposure (E) to overweight and obesity, control (C) to eutrophic adult pregnant women, and results (O) to adverse outcomes or maternal complications, without any restriction of work type (S) in this instance.

The search strategy was properly designed for PubMed, and modified for the other databases; thus, eligible studies were identified (Table I).

Table I. Search strategies used on the electronic databases PubMed, Scopus, Lillacs, and Cochrane Library 

aUpdated in 10/21/2016;

bUpdated in 10/22/16;

cUpdated in 10/28 /16;

dUpdated in 10/05/16. P: population; E: exposure.

ARTICLE SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

The articles were selected based on the previously established criteria for eligibility. The initial selection by title and Abstract was performed independently by two researchers, and non-concordant cases were evaluated by a third researcher. When an article was found in more than one database, only one was considered.

Initially, titles and abstracts were evaluated to assess if they met the pre-defined inclusion criteria. Next, the researchers independently or by pairs reviewed the full articles, and the third reviewer was consulted in case of disagreement.

Data from the articles were then entered in spreadsheets containing the relevant study characteristics important for interpreting the results (study type, follow-up period, control of confusion factors, and adjustments), and analyzed in terms of the quality of evidence as based on the GRADE methodology. The last procedure was conducted independently, with the conflicting cases being evaluated by the third researcher.

RESULTS

The summary of the selection process is shown in the flow diagram (Fig. 1). In total, 39 of 1,582 publications initially screened were selected for final analysis. Of these, 5 (12.8 %), 27 (69.2 %), and 7 (18.0 %) were classified as A, B, and C or D regarding evidence grade, respectively, using the GRADE guideline.

Figure 1. Flow chart for study selection (DM: diabetes mellitus; NS: nutritional status). 

DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDIES INCLUDED

The summary of the general characteristics and qualitative evaluation of the studies is presented in table II. The included studies, all observational in nature, had different sample sizes, objectives and outcomes, were performed between 1991 and 2015, and were published between 2001 and 2016. Most of the investigations focused on the south and south-eastern regions of Brazil (74.4 %).

Table II. Selected studies about the effects of pregestational excess weight on maternal outcomes in Brazilian pregnant women 

PGNS: pregestational nutritional status; OW: overweight; OB: obese; WHO: World Health Organization; IOM: Institute of Medicine; BMI: body mass index; PE: pre-eclampsia; GDM: gestational diabetes mellitus; OR: odds ratio; RR: relative risk; CI: confidence interval; HDP: hypertensive disorders of pregnancy; SBP: systolic blood pressure; DBP: diastolic blood pressure; ALI: aminiotic liquid index; GHSP: gestational hypertension superimposed to preeclampsia; CRP: C-reative protein.

About two-thirds of the studies used the recommendations of the World Health Organization (1998), adopted by the Institute of Medicine (2009), for the classification of pregestational nutritional status. Only one article had a distribution of BMI per quartiles. Approximately, 30 % of the studies on excess body weight classified BMI in two independent categories (overweight and obese), and 38.2 % classified it in one category (BMI: ≥ 25 kg/m², ≥ 30 kg/m², or ≥ 35 kg/m²). Studies on maternal outcomes according to class of obesity were not available during the period of data collection.

More than half of the selected studies (51.8 %) reported adverse outcomes associated with excess body weight, including HDP, caesarean section, inadequate weight gain during pregnancy, and GDM. In addition, approximately 48 % of the studies showed an association between pregestational excessive body weight and repeated miscarriages/losses, postpartum weight retention, infections, periodontal disease, metabolic changes, iron deficiencies, behavioural changes, anaesthetic changes, and post-delivery bleeding.

DISCUSSION

The effect of increased BMI on gestation has been widely reported in international studies (52). In addition, there is a dose-response effect with worse outcomes when an increase in obesity class is observed (53). However, in Brazil only few studies focus on this issue due to the difficulty in conducting studies with more representative sample sizes that include pregnant women with excess body weight.

In this review, only results from observational studies were included due to the lack of clinical trials that met the eligibility criteria. Although observational studies are considered as a priori with low quality of evidence, they might assume a better status when methodological criteria are well established and findings are consistent (12). Therefore, some of the studies presented here revealed these conditions.

PREGNANCY-RELATED OUTCOMES

HDP (or increase in blood pressure) and GDM were identified as common clinical findings associated with overweight and obesity (13 14 15 16 17-18, 20, 23, 25, 26, 33, 51). These results are similar worldwide (54). A meta-analysis conducted by Wang et al. (55) revealed that adiposity is an independent risk factor for preeclampsia.

Aiming to quantify the proportion of adverse pregnancy outcomes attributable to maternal obesity, a study conducted in London demonstrated that increased pregestational BMI was independently associated with an increasing risk of diabetes, caesarean section and macrosomia. However, race/ethnicity are potential effect-size modifiers (7).

The current scientific literature has also highlighted the endocrine- metabolic alterations caused by obesity based on the specific markers associated with adverse outcomes in maternal and infant health. Relevant studies were also conducted in Brazil, and some were included in this review (24,27). Although physiological, the change in glucolipid profile when uncontrolled can lead to higher cardiovascular risk, and obesity may have caused such lack of control (56).

Several articles that show the association between pregestational excess weight and accentuated weight gain are available. A systematic review conducted in Brazil by Godoy et al. (57) found a higher incidence of weight gain in Brazilian pregnant women who were overweight. This has been a cause of concern and requires short-term actions and immediate control because these women have a higher risk of developing obesity.

Other outcomes related to excess body weight during pregnancy were identified in this review: a higher occurrence of periodontal disease (19), iron deficiency (21), urinary incontinence (22), sleep disorders (30), sexual dysfunction (29), and changes in body image satisfaction (31,32). It is also relevant that in Brazil a systematic review identified an association between BMI increase during pregnancy and emotional disorders such as depression, anxiety, and stress, caused by humiliation and exposure to obesity-related stigmatization (58).

DELIVERY-RELATED OUTCOMES

Caesarean section among women with excess body weight, particularly when obese, was a common adverse outcome in the present study (40,41,43,49 50- 51, similar to the study by Marchi et al. (32). The biological mechanisms to explain the effect of obesity on this outcome are still not completely elucidated. The increased number of adipocytes in obese individuals may change the pelvic structure, with excessive inflammatory response compromising the physiological process of normal delivery (32).

Increased rates of caesarean section were described in obese women in the presence of fetal distress, cephalopelvic disproportion, and previous caesarean section. On the other hand, the presence of clinical complications such as diabetes and hypertensive disorders is involved in a major proportion of medical referrals for surgical delivery (2). Although these events will add additional risks, overweight and obesity represents an independent risk factor for the occurrence of caesarean section according to a meta-analysis conducted by Chu et al. (59).

Among the studies analyzed, only one cited the induction of labor tha resulted in caesarean section, but does not quantify this occurrence among obese pregnant women. In the study, obese women had a higher rate of cephalopelvic disproportion (11.0 %) as an indication for caesarean section when compared to 6.2 % among eutrophic women (40).

In this sense, national scale studies should be conducted considering the multifactorial network involved in the determination of caesarean section among pregnant women with excess weight. Complications due to anaesthesia, presence of meconium in the amniotic fluid, and increased risk for developing infection are more common in pregnant women with excess body weight (40,42,45). However, these outcomes are yet to be validated. Thus, future studies on this topic must be conducted in Brazil.

POST-DELIVERY-RELATED OUTCOMES

Two studies focusing on the association between maternal excess body weight and maintenance of post-delivery weight were identified (46,48). A systematic review has shown that higher pregestational BMI and accentuated weight gain during pregnancy were strong predictors of obesity among Brazilian women (60).

Despite a lack of studies with more representative samples, the maternal mortality rate is 50 % higher in obese pregnant women, and HDP, which have obesity as risk factor, are considered the primary cause of maternal death in the country. Therefore, the maintenance of normal weight must be reinforced during the start of the reproductive cycle (2,6).

LIMITATIONS

The present review presented some limitations such as the heterogeneity of the studies involved, with different sample sizes and measures of results. Several of the articles showed a variety of outcomes and used different cut-off points for the identification of pregestational excess weight. Some articles considered excess body weight as a single category without distinction between overweight and obesity, and it was not possible to identify studies that described maternal adverse outcomes according to obesity class. This is an important aspect to be considered, since different results could be found by considering obesity BMI classes (53).

Despite these limitations, the study's relevance should be highlighted. There are few studies discussing the association of nutritional status in pregnant women and its effects on maternal outcomes, as the focus has been usually on fetal ones. Our results showed the need for concern about women's health since overweight and obesity are increasing in the Brazilian population, and lead to worse maternal outcomes. If national studies with more robust samples were carried out, we could have an in-depth discussion of this issue in Brazil. All published and available studies on the subject were included in this review, and their results were carefully interpreted.

CONCLUSION

Pregestational excess weight was associated with increasing rates of preeclampsia, gestational hypertension, GDM, excessive gestational weight gain, and caesarean section in Brazilian women.

Despite the lack of studies with more representative samples of Brazilian population, which are strongly recommended, the negative effects of pregestational excess weight reflect the need for effective public policies that may address the problem, focusing on interventions that promote the health of women at reproductive age.

REFERENCES

1. World Health Organization. Obesity and overweight: fact sheet. [Updated February 2018]. Available at https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/obesity-and-overweight. [ Links ]

2. Poston L, Caleyachetty R, Cnattingius S, Corvalán C, Uauy R, Herring S, et al. Preconceptional and maternal obesity:epidemiology and health consequences. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2016;4(12):1025-36. DOI: 10.1016/S2213-8587(16)30217-0 [ Links ]

3. World Health Organization. Global action plan for the prevention and control for noncommunicable diseases 2013-2020. Genebra: World Health Organization; 2013. [ Links ]

4. Ministry of Health of Brazil. Vigitel Brasil 2018: vigilância de fatores de risco e proteção para doenças crônicas por inquérito telefônico. Brasília: Ministry of Health; 2019. [ Links ]

5. Institute of Medicine. Weight Gain During Pregnancy: Reexamining the Guidelines. Washington: The National Academies Press;2009. [ Links ]

6. Stang J, Huffman LG. Position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics: Obesity, Reproduction, and Pregnancy Outcomes. J Acad Nutr Diet 2016;116(4):677-91. DOI:10.1016/j.jand.2016.01.008 [ Links ]

7. Oteng-Ntim E, Kopeika J, Seed P, Wandiembe S, Doyle P. Impact of obesity on pregnancy outcome in different ethnic groups:calculating population attributable fractions. PLoS One 2013;8(1):e53749. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0053749 [ Links ]

8. Magann EF, Doherty DA, Sandlin AT, Chauhan SP, Morrison JC. The effects of an increasing gradient of maternal obesity on pregnancy outcomes. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2013;53(3):250-7. DOI: 10.1111/ajo.12047 [ Links ]

9. Silva JC, Amaral AR, Ferreira BS, Willeman IKM, Silva MR, Salles WB. Obesidade materna e suas consequências na gestação e no parto: uma revisão sistemática. Femina 2014;42(3):135-40. [ Links ]

10. Kair LR, Nickel NC, Jones K, Kornfeind K, Sipsma HL. Hospital Breastfeeding Support and Exclusive Breastfeeding by Maternal Pre-Pregnancy BMI. Matern Child Nutr 2019:e12783. DOI: 10.1111/mcn.12783 [ Links ]

11. Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev 2015;4:1. DOI: 10.1186/2046-4053-4-1 [ Links ]

12. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2008;336(7650):924-6. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.AD [ Links ]

13. Nucci LB, Schmidt MI, Duncan BB, Fuchs SC, Fleck ET, Santos Britto MM. Nutritional status of pregnant women: prevalence and associated pregnancy outcomes. Rev Saude Publica 2001;35(6):502-7. DOI: 10.1590/S0034-89102001000600002 [ Links ]

14. Assis TR, Viana FP, Rassi S. Estudo dos principais fatores de risco maternos nas síndromes hipertensivas da gestação. Arq Bras Cardiol 2008; 91(1):11-7. DOI: 10.1590/S0066-782X2008001300002 [ Links ]

15. Wendland EMDR, Duncan BB, Belizan JM, Vigo A, Schmidt MI. Gestational diabetes and pre-eclampsia:common antecedents? Arq Bras Endocrinol Metab 2008;52(6):975-84. DOI: 10.1590/S0004-27302008000600008 [ Links ]

16. Dode MASO, Santos IS. Risk factors for gestational diabetes mellitus in the birth cohort in Pelotas, Rio Grande do Sul State, Brazil, 2004. Cad Saúde Pública 2009;25(5):1141-52. DOI: 10.1590/S0102-311X2009000500021 [ Links ]

17. Seabra G, Padilha PC, Queiroz JA, Saunders C. Sobrepeso e obesidade pré-gestacionais: prevalência e desfechos associados àgestação. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2011;33(11):348-53. DOI:10.1590/S0100-72032011001100005 [ Links ]

18. Santos EMF, Amorim LP, Costa OLN, Oliveira N, Guimarães AC.Profile of gestational and metabolic risk in the prenatal care service of a public maternity in the Brazilian Northeast. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2012;34(3):102-6. DOI: 10.1590/S0100-72032012000300002 [ Links ]

19. Vogt M, Sallum AW, Cecatti JG, Morais SS. Factors associated with the prevalence of periodontal disease in low-risk pregnant women. Reprod Health 2012;9:3. DOI: 10.1186/1742-4755-9-3 [ Links ]

20. Dantas EM, Pereira FV, Queiroz JW, Dantas DL, Monteiro GR, Duggal P, et al. Preeclampsia is associated with increased maternal body weight in a northeastern Brazilian population. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2013;13:159. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2393-13-159 [ Links ]

21. Camargo RMS, Espinosa MM, Pereira SF, Schirmer J. Prevalence of anemia and iron deficiency: Association with body mass index in women of Brazilian Midwest. Medicina (Ribeirão Preto) 2013;46(2):118-27. [ Links ]

22. Oliveira CD, Seleme M, Cansi PF, Consentino RF, Kumakura FY, Moreira GA, et al. Urinary incontinence in pregnant women and its relation with socio-demographic variables and quality of life. Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992) 2013;59(5):460-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.ramb.2013.08.002 [ Links ]

23. Queiroz MR. Ocorrência das síndromes hipertensivas na gravidez e fatores associados na região sudeste do Brasil [dissertação]. São Paulo: Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Saúde Pública;2014. DOI: 10.11606/D.6.2014.tde-20022014-103621 [ Links ]

24. Franco-Sena AB, de Oliveira LC, de Jesus Pereira Pinto T, Farias DR, Vaz J dos S, Kac G. Factors associated with prospective leptin concentrations throughout pregnancy in pregestational normal weight, overweight and obese women. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 2015;82(1):127-35. DOI: 10.1111/cen.12487 [ Links ]

25. Rebelo F, Farias DR, Mendes RH, Schlüssel MM, Kac G. Blood Pressure Variation Throughout Pregnancy According to Early Gestational BMI:A Brazilian Cohort. Arq Bras Cardiol 2015;104(4):284-91. DOI: 10.5935/abc.20150007 [ Links ]

26. Salles GF, Schlüssel MM, Farias DR, Franco-Sena AB, Rebelo F, Lacerda EM, et al. Blood pressure in healthy pregnancy and factors associated with no mid-trimester blood pressure drop: a prospective cohort study. Am J Hypertens 2015;28(5):680-9. DOI:10.1093/ajh/hpu204 [ Links ]

27. Farias DR, Franco-Sena AB, Vilela A, Lepsch J, Mendes RH, Kac G. Lipid changes throughout pregnancy according to pre-pregnancy BMI: results from a prospective cohort. BJOG 2016;123(4):570-8. DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.13293 [ Links ]

28. Oliveira LC, Franco-Sena AB, Rebelo F, Farias DR, Lepsch J, Lima NS. Factors associated with maternal serum C-reactive protein throughout pregnancy:A longitudinal study in women of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Nutrition 2015;31(9):1103-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.nut.2015.04.006 [ Links ]

29. Ribeiro MC, Nakamura MU, Torloni MR, Scanavino MT, Mancini PE, Forte BM, et al. Maternal overweight and sexual function in pregnancy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2016;95(1):45-51. DOI: 10.1111/aogs.12796 [ Links ]

30. Ribeiro MC, Nakamura MU, Torloni MR, Scanavino MT, Forte BMB, Mancine PE, et al. Sleep quality in overweight pregnant women. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2015;37(8):359-65. DOI: 10.1590/SO100-720320150005415 [ Links ]

31. Meireles JFF, Neves CM, de Carvalho PHB, Ferreira ME. Satisfação corporal, idade gestacional e estado nutricional em gestantes. ABCS Health Sci 2016;41(1):23-8. DOI: 10.7322/abcshs.v41i1.841 [ Links ]

32. Meireles JF, Neves CM, de Carvalho PH, Ferreira ME. Body image of pregnant women: association with sociodemographic, anthropometric, and obstetric variables. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2015;37(7):319-24. DOI: 10.1590/S0100-720320150005388 [ Links ]

33. Vernini JM, Moreli JB, Magalhães CG, Costa RAA, Rudge MVC, Calderon IMP. Maternal and fetal outcomes in pregnancies complicated by overweight and obesity. Reprod Health 2016;13(1):100. DOI: 10.1186/s12978-016-0206-0 [ Links ]

34. Nucci LB, Duncan BB, Mengue SS, Branchtein S, Schmidt MI, Fleck ET. Assessment of weight gain during pregnancy in general prenatal care services in Brazil. Cad Saúde Pública 2001;17(6):1367-74. DOI: 10.1590/S0102-311X2001000600007 [ Links ]

35. Andreto LM, Souza AI, Figueiroa JN, Cabral-Filho JE. Factors associated with excessive gestational weight gain among patients in prenatal care at a public hospital in Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil. Cad Saúde Pública 2006;22(11):2401-9. DOI: 10.1590/S0102-311X2006001100014 [ Links ]

36. Rodrigues PL, de Oliveira LC, Brito Ados S, Kac G. Determinant factors of insufficient and excessive gestational weight gain and maternal-child adverse outcomes. Nutrition 2010;26(6):617-23. DOI: 10.1016/j.nut.2009.06.025 [ Links ]

37. Drehmer M, Camey S, Schmidt MI, Olinto MTA, Giacomello A, Buss C, et al. Socioeconomic, demographic and nutritional factors associated with maternal weight gain in general practices in Southern Brazil. Cad Saúde Pública 2010;26(5):1024-34. DOI: 10.1590/S0102-311X2010000500024 [ Links ]

38. Marano D, da Gama SGN, Pereira APE, Souza Jr PRB. Adequacy of weight gain in pregnant women from two municipalities of Rio de Janeiro state (RJ), Brazil, 2008. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2012;34(8):386-93. DOI: 10.1590/S0100-72032012000800008 [ Links ]

39. Fraga ACSA, Theme Filha mm. Factors associated with gestational weight gain in pregnant women in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2008. Cad Saúde Pública 2014;30(3):633-44. DOI: 10.1590/0102-311X00085313 [ Links ]

40. Seligman LC, Duncan BB, Branchtein L, Gaio DS, Mengue SS, Schmidt MI. Obesity and gestational weight gain: cesarean delivery and labor complications. Rev Saude Publica 2006;40(3):457-65. DOI: 10.1590/s0034-89102006000300014 [ Links ]

41. Pádua KS, Osis MJD, Faúndes A, Barbosa AH, Moraes Filho OB. Factors associated with cesarean sections in Brazilian hospitals. Rev Saúde Pública 2010;44(1):70-7. DOI:10.1590/S0034-89102010000100008 [ Links ]

42. Rodrigues FR, Brandão MJN. Anestesia regional para cesariana em gestantes obesas:estudo retrospectivo. Rev Bras Anestesiol 2011;61(1):13-20. DOI:10.1590/S0034-70942011000100002 [ Links ]

43. Gonçalves CV, Mendoza-Sassi RA, Cesar JÁ, Castro NB, Bortolomedi AP. Body mass index and gestational weight gain as factors predicting complications and pregnancy outcome. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2012;34(7):304-9. DOI: 10.1590/S0100-72032012000700003 [ Links ]

44. Guerra-Shinohara EM, Pereira PM, Kubota AM, Silva TA, Reis JL, Miyashita GS, et al. Increased mmA concentration and body mass index are associated with spontaneous abortion in Brazilian women:a pilot study. Clin Chim Acta 2010;411(5-6):423-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.cca.2009.12.014 [ Links ]

45. Nani FS, Torres MLA. Correlação entre o índice de massa corporal (IMC) de gestantes e hipotensão após raquianestesia para cesarianas. Rev Bras Anestesiol 2011;61(1):25-30. DOI: 10.1590/S0034-70942011000100003 [ Links ]

46. Silva MCM, Oliveira AM, Oliveira LPM, Fonseca NSS, Santana MLP, Góes Neto EA, et al. Determinants of postpartum weight variation in a cohort of adult women; a hierarchical approach. Nutr Hosp 2013;28(3):660-70. DOI: 10.3305/nh.2013.28.3.6391 [ Links ]

47. Costa OLN, Santos EMF, Netto EM. Epidemiological and obstetrics aspects in women with recurrent pregnancy losses at a public maternity in the Brazilian Northeast. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2014;36(11):514-8. DOI: 10.1590/S0100-720320140005007 [ Links ]

48. Zanotti J, Capp E, Wender MC. Factors associated with postpartum weight retention in a Brazilian cohort. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2015;37(4):164-71. DOI: 10.1590/SO100-720320150005186 [ Links ]

49. Calderon AC, Quintana SM, Marcolin AC, Berezowski AT, Brito LG, Duarte G, et al. Obesity and pregnancy:a transversal study from a low-risk maternity. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2014;14:249. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2393-14-249 [ Links ]

50. Godoy AC, Nascimento SL, Kasawara KT, Oushiro NH, Surita FG. A population-based study on gestational weight gain according to body mass index in the southeast of Brazil. Physiology Journal 2014;2014:956960. DOI: 10.1155/2014/956960 [ Links ]

51. Silva JC, Amaral AR, Ferreira BS, Petry JF, Ribeiro e Silva M, Krelling PC. Obesity during pregnancy:gestational complications and birth outcomes. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2014;36(11):509-13. DOI: 10.1590/S0100-720320140005024 [ Links ]

52. Marchi J, Berg M, Dencker A, Olander EK, Begley C. Risks associated with obesity in pregnancy, for the mother and baby: a systematic review of reviews. Obes Rev 2015;16(8):621-38. DOI: 10.1111/obr.12288 [ Links ]

53. El-Chaar D, Finkelstein SA, Tu X, Fell DB, Gaudet L, Sylvain J, et al. The impact of increasing obesity class on obstetrical outcomes. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2013;35(3):224-33. DOI: 10.1016/S1701-2163(15)30994-4 [ Links ]

54. Moussa HN, Alrais MA, Leon MG, Abbas EL, Sibai BM. Obesity epidemic: impact from preconception to postpartum. Future Sci OA 2016;2(3):FSO137. DOI: 10.4155/fsoa-2016-0035 [ Links ]

55. Wang Z, Wang P, Liu H, He X, Zhang J, Yan H, et al. Maternal adiposity as an independent risk factor for pre-eclampsia: a meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. Obes Rev 2013;14(6):508-21. DOI:10.1111/obr.12025 [ Links ]

56. Callegari SBM, de Resende EAMR, Barbosa Neto O, Rodrigues Jr V, Oliveira EM, Borges MF. Obesity and cardiometabolic risk factors during pregnancy. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2014;36(10):449-55. DOI: 10.1590/SO100-720320140004946 [ Links ]

57. Godoy AC, Nascimento SL, Surita FG. A systematic review and meta-analysis of gestational weight gain recommendations and related outcomes in Brazil. Clinics (Sao Paulo) 2015;70(11):758–64. DOI: 10.6061/clinics/2015(11)08 [ Links ]

58. Molyneaux E, Poston L, Ashurst-Williams S, Howard LM. Obesity and mental disorders during pregnancy and postpartum: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2014;123(4):857-67. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000170 [ Links ]

59. Chu SY, Kim SY, Schmid CH, Dietz PM, Callaghan WM, Lau J, et al. Maternal obesity and risk of cesarean delivery:a meta-analysis. Obes Rev 2007;8(5):385-94. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-789X.2007.00397.x [ Links ]

60. Lacerda EMA, Leal MC. Risk factors associated with postpartum weight gain and retention:a systematic review. Rev Bras epidemiol 2004;7(2):187-200. DOI: 10.1590/S1415-790X2004000200008 [ Links ]

Brandão T, Moraes CF, Ferreira DM, Santos K, Padilha PC, Saunders C. Pregestational excess weight and adverse maternal outcomes: a systematic review of previous studies in Brazil. Nutr Hosp 2020;37(2):384-395.

Received: September 01, 2019; Accepted: October 25, 2019

Correspondence: Cláudia Saunders. Instituto de Nutrição Josué de Castro. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. Centro de Ciências da Saúde, Bloco J. Av. Carlos Chagas Filho, 373. Cidade Universitária. Rio de Janeiro 21941-902. Brasil e-mail: claudiasaunders@nutricao.ufrj.br

Author's contribution:

Idea, design, achievement, analysis, data interpretation: Thelma Brandão, Carolina Felizardo de Moraes, Danielle Masterson Ferreira, Karina dos Santos, Patrícia de Carvalho Padilha, and Cláudia Saunders. Elaboration (article writing) / Critical review: Thelma Brandão, Carolina Felizardo de Moraes, Danielle Masterson Ferreira, Karina dos Santos, Patrícia de Carvalho Padilha, and Cláudia Saunders. Final approval of the submitted version: Thelma Brandão, Carolina Felizardo de Moraes, Danielle Masterson Ferreira, Karina dos Santos, Patrícia de Carvalho Padilha and Cláudia Saunders.

This review was registered in PROSPERO (International prospective register of systematic reviews -http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO) under number 42017055878.

Conflict of interest:

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Creative Commons License This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License