Why the study?
Maternal depression during pregnancy affects 18-20% of women and is associated with adverse offspring outcomes, but the cardiovascular response in offspring required further investigation.
Does maternal exposure to chronic mild stress impair cardiovascular function in offspring?
Does maternal exposure to chronic mild stress impair cardiovascular function in offspring?
Maternal depression modeled by chronic mild stress in rats leads to impaired left ventricular diastolic function and increased BNP expression in offspring.
Preclinical maternal stress model affects offspring cardiac parameters; leaves open human translation to maternal depression effects.
Maternal depression during pregnancy affects 18–20% of women and is often associated with comorbidities and adverse health outcomes for the offspring. We have previously reported on neurodevelopmental delays in a rat model of maternal depression during pregnancy; current report presents echocardiographic (ECHO) data derived from the same experiment and focuses on cardiovascular response in the offspring to maternal perinatal depression. Rat dams were exposed to chronic mild stress (CMS) with repeated restraint before pregnancy. Cardiac functions were assessed in the 35-day-old offspring, derived from control (CO, n = 11) and stress-exposed dams (SO, n = 16), using echocardiography (ECHO). The expression of cardiac failure marker – B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) was measured in the myocardium by RT-PCR. ECHO analysis revealed a significant increase in heart rate (HR) and impairment of left ventricular diastolic function parameters. Importantly, a significant increase in mitral valve flow E wave velocity (MVE) and a decrease of mitral valve deceleration time of E wave (MV DT) were observed in SO. The expression of BNP was significantly higher in SO. These results suggest that maternal depression during pregnancy impacts offspring cardiovascular function, and specifically the diastolic cardiac functions of the left ventricle.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Czarzasta et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: