Cargando…

Obesity and gynaecological and obstetric conditions: umbrella review of the literature

Objective To study the strength and validity of associations between adiposity and risk of any type of obstetric or gynaecological conditions. Design An umbrella review of meta-analyses. Data sources PubMed, Cochrane database of systematic reviews, manual screening of references for systematic revie...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kalliala, Ilkka, Markozannes, Georgios, Gunter, Marc J, Paraskevaidis, Evangelos, Gabra, Hani, Mitra, Anita, Terzidou, Vasso, Bennett, Phillip, Martin-Hirsch, Pierre, Tsilidis, Konstantinos K, Kyrgiou, Maria
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5656976/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29074629
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j4511
_version_ 1783273799968358400
author Kalliala, Ilkka
Markozannes, Georgios
Gunter, Marc J
Paraskevaidis, Evangelos
Gabra, Hani
Mitra, Anita
Terzidou, Vasso
Bennett, Phillip
Martin-Hirsch, Pierre
Tsilidis, Konstantinos K
Kyrgiou, Maria
author_facet Kalliala, Ilkka
Markozannes, Georgios
Gunter, Marc J
Paraskevaidis, Evangelos
Gabra, Hani
Mitra, Anita
Terzidou, Vasso
Bennett, Phillip
Martin-Hirsch, Pierre
Tsilidis, Konstantinos K
Kyrgiou, Maria
author_sort Kalliala, Ilkka
collection PubMed
description Objective To study the strength and validity of associations between adiposity and risk of any type of obstetric or gynaecological conditions. Design An umbrella review of meta-analyses. Data sources PubMed, Cochrane database of systematic reviews, manual screening of references for systematic reviews or meta-analyses of observational and interventional studies evaluating the association between adiposity and risk of any obstetrical or gynaecological outcome. Main outcomes Meta-analyses of cohort studies on associations between indices of adiposity and obstetric and gynaecological outcomes. Data synthesis Evidence from observational studies was graded into strong, highly suggestive, suggestive, or weak based on the significance of the random effects summary estimate and the largest study in the included meta-analysis, the number of cases, heterogeneity between studies, 95% prediction intervals, small study effects, excess significance bias, and sensitivity analysis with credibility ceilings. Interventional meta-analyses were assessed separately. Results 156 meta-analyses of observational studies were included, investigating associations between adiposity and risk of 84 obstetric or gynaecological outcomes. Of the 144 meta-analyses that included cohort studies, only 11 (8%) had strong evidence for eight outcomes: adiposity was associated with a higher risk of endometrial cancer, ovarian cancer, antenatal depression, total and emergency caesarean section, pre-eclampsia, fetal macrosomia, and low Apgar score. The summary effect estimates ranged from 1.21 (95% confidence interval 1.13 to 1.29) for an association between a 0.1 unit increase in waist to hip ratio and risk endometrial cancer up to 4.14 (3.61 to 4.75) for risk of pre-eclampsia for BMI >35 compared with <25. Only three out of these eight outcomes were also assessed in meta-analyses of trials evaluating weight loss interventions. These interventions significantly reduced the risk of caesarean section and pre-eclampsia, whereas there was no evidence of association with fetal macrosomia. Conclusions Although the associations between adiposity and obstetric and gynaecological outcomes have been extensively studied, only a minority were considered strong and without hints of bias.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5656976
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56569762017-10-27 Obesity and gynaecological and obstetric conditions: umbrella review of the literature Kalliala, Ilkka Markozannes, Georgios Gunter, Marc J Paraskevaidis, Evangelos Gabra, Hani Mitra, Anita Terzidou, Vasso Bennett, Phillip Martin-Hirsch, Pierre Tsilidis, Konstantinos K Kyrgiou, Maria BMJ Research Objective To study the strength and validity of associations between adiposity and risk of any type of obstetric or gynaecological conditions. Design An umbrella review of meta-analyses. Data sources PubMed, Cochrane database of systematic reviews, manual screening of references for systematic reviews or meta-analyses of observational and interventional studies evaluating the association between adiposity and risk of any obstetrical or gynaecological outcome. Main outcomes Meta-analyses of cohort studies on associations between indices of adiposity and obstetric and gynaecological outcomes. Data synthesis Evidence from observational studies was graded into strong, highly suggestive, suggestive, or weak based on the significance of the random effects summary estimate and the largest study in the included meta-analysis, the number of cases, heterogeneity between studies, 95% prediction intervals, small study effects, excess significance bias, and sensitivity analysis with credibility ceilings. Interventional meta-analyses were assessed separately. Results 156 meta-analyses of observational studies were included, investigating associations between adiposity and risk of 84 obstetric or gynaecological outcomes. Of the 144 meta-analyses that included cohort studies, only 11 (8%) had strong evidence for eight outcomes: adiposity was associated with a higher risk of endometrial cancer, ovarian cancer, antenatal depression, total and emergency caesarean section, pre-eclampsia, fetal macrosomia, and low Apgar score. The summary effect estimates ranged from 1.21 (95% confidence interval 1.13 to 1.29) for an association between a 0.1 unit increase in waist to hip ratio and risk endometrial cancer up to 4.14 (3.61 to 4.75) for risk of pre-eclampsia for BMI >35 compared with <25. Only three out of these eight outcomes were also assessed in meta-analyses of trials evaluating weight loss interventions. These interventions significantly reduced the risk of caesarean section and pre-eclampsia, whereas there was no evidence of association with fetal macrosomia. Conclusions Although the associations between adiposity and obstetric and gynaecological outcomes have been extensively studied, only a minority were considered strong and without hints of bias. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2017-10-26 /pmc/articles/PMC5656976/ /pubmed/29074629 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j4511 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Research
Kalliala, Ilkka
Markozannes, Georgios
Gunter, Marc J
Paraskevaidis, Evangelos
Gabra, Hani
Mitra, Anita
Terzidou, Vasso
Bennett, Phillip
Martin-Hirsch, Pierre
Tsilidis, Konstantinos K
Kyrgiou, Maria
Obesity and gynaecological and obstetric conditions: umbrella review of the literature
title Obesity and gynaecological and obstetric conditions: umbrella review of the literature
title_full Obesity and gynaecological and obstetric conditions: umbrella review of the literature
title_fullStr Obesity and gynaecological and obstetric conditions: umbrella review of the literature
title_full_unstemmed Obesity and gynaecological and obstetric conditions: umbrella review of the literature
title_short Obesity and gynaecological and obstetric conditions: umbrella review of the literature
title_sort obesity and gynaecological and obstetric conditions: umbrella review of the literature
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5656976/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29074629
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j4511
work_keys_str_mv AT kallialailkka obesityandgynaecologicalandobstetricconditionsumbrellareviewoftheliterature
AT markozannesgeorgios obesityandgynaecologicalandobstetricconditionsumbrellareviewoftheliterature
AT guntermarcj obesityandgynaecologicalandobstetricconditionsumbrellareviewoftheliterature
AT paraskevaidisevangelos obesityandgynaecologicalandobstetricconditionsumbrellareviewoftheliterature
AT gabrahani obesityandgynaecologicalandobstetricconditionsumbrellareviewoftheliterature
AT mitraanita obesityandgynaecologicalandobstetricconditionsumbrellareviewoftheliterature
AT terzidouvasso obesityandgynaecologicalandobstetricconditionsumbrellareviewoftheliterature
AT bennettphillip obesityandgynaecologicalandobstetricconditionsumbrellareviewoftheliterature
AT martinhirschpierre obesityandgynaecologicalandobstetricconditionsumbrellareviewoftheliterature
AT tsilidiskonstantinosk obesityandgynaecologicalandobstetricconditionsumbrellareviewoftheliterature
AT kyrgioumaria obesityandgynaecologicalandobstetricconditionsumbrellareviewoftheliterature