Hostname: page-component-669899f699-vbsjw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-02T05:12:22.122Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Body composition from birth to 6 months in term small-for-gestational-age Indian infants: effect of catch-up growth

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2024

Brijesh Kumar Open the ORCID record for Brijesh Kumar [Opens in a new window] ,
Pratima Anand ,
Harish Chellani ,
Ramesh Agarwal  and
Vandana Jain Open the ORCID record for Vandana Jain [Opens in a new window]
Brijesh Kumar
Affiliation:
Paediatric Endocrinology Division, Department of Paediatrics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi 110029, India
Pratima Anand
Affiliation:
Neonatology Unit, Department of Paediatrics, Vardhman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, India
Harish Chellani
Affiliation:
Neonatology Unit, Department of Paediatrics, Vardhman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, India
Ramesh Agarwal
Affiliation:
Neonatology Unit, Department of Paediatrics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
Vandana Jain*
Affiliation:
Paediatric Endocrinology Division, Department of Paediatrics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi 110029, India
*
*Corresponding author: Vandana Jain, email [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The objective of this prospective observational study was to assess the growth and body composition of term small-for-gestational-age (SGA) infants from birth to 6 months and evaluate the effect of catch-up growth (CUG) on body composition. Term SGA newborns were recruited at birth. Anthropometry and body composition were evaluated at 3 days, 6, 10 and 14 weeks, and 6 months. Fat and fat-free mass (FM and FFM) were compared between infants with and without CUG (increase in weight Z-score by > 0·67) by air displacement plethysmography. Factors that could affect body composition and CUG, including parents’ BMI and stature, infants’ birth weight, sex and feeding, were evaluated. A total of 143 SGA newborns (sixty-six boys) with birth weight of 2336 (sd 214) g were enrolled; 109 were followed up till 6 months. Median weight Z-score increased from −2·3 at birth to −1·3 at 6 months, with 51·9 % of infants showing CUG. Infants with CUG had higher FM (1796 (sd 491) g v. 1196 (sd 474) g, P < 0·001) but similar FFM (4969 (sd 508) g v. 4870 (sd 622) g, P = 0·380), and consequently higher FM percentage (FM%) (26·5 (sd 5·8) v. 19·7 (sd 6·9), P < 0·001), compared with those without CUG. Lower birth weight, exclusive breast-feeding and higher parental stature were positively associated with CUG. In conclusion, CUG in term SGA infants in the first 6 months of life was almost entirely attributable to greater gain in FM. Follow-up of this cohort will provide insight into the long-term effect of disproportionate gain in FM in early infancy in SGA babies.

Keywords

Low birth weight infantsAccelerated growthFat mass percentageInfancy growthAdiposity
Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 132 , Issue 3 , 14 August 2024 , pp. 289 - 297
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Nutrition Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Lear, SA, Kohli, S, Bondy, GP, et al. (2009) Ethnic variation in fat and lean body mass and the association with insulin resistance. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 94, 4696–4702.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mohan, V, Venkatraman, JV & Pradeepa, R (2010). Epidemiology of cardiovascular disease in type 2 diabetes: the Indian scenario. J Diabetes Sci Technol 4, 158–170.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Black, RE (2015) Global prevalence of small for gestational age births. Nestle Nutr Inst Workshop Ser 81, 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yajnik, CS, Fall, CH, Coyaji, KJ, et al. (2003) Neonatal anthropometry: the thin-fat Indian baby. Pune Maternal Nutr Study Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 27, 173–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jain, V, Kurpad, AV, Kumar, B, et al. (2016) Body composition of term healthy Indian newborns. Eur J Clin Nutr 70, 488–493.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuriyan, R, Naqvi, S, Bhat, KG, et al. (2020) The thin but fat phenotype is uncommon at birth in Indian babies. J Nutr 150, 826–832.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Khandelwal, P, Jain, V, Gupta, AK, et al. (2014) Association of early postnatal growth trajectory with body composition in term low birth weight infants. J Dev Orig Health Dis 5, 189–196.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jain, V, Kumar, B, Devi, S, et al. (2022) Body composition from birth to 2 years in term healthy Indian infants measured by deuterium dilution: effect of being born small for gestational age and early catch-up growth. Eur J Clin Nutr 76, 1165–1171.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boone-Heinonen, J, Messer, LC, Fortmann, SP, et al. (2015) From fatalism to mitigation: a conceptual framework for mitigating fetal programming of chronic disease by maternal obesity. Prev Med 81, 451–459.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Villar, J, Ismail, LC, Victora, CG, et al. (2014) International fetal and newborn growth consortium for the 21st century (INTERGROWTH-21st). International standards for newborn weight, length, and head circumference by gestational age and sex: the Newborn Cross-Sectional Study of the INTERGROWTH-21st Project. Lancet 384(9946), 857–868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Institute of Medicine, Rasmussen, KM & Yaktine, AL (editors) (2009) Weight Gain During Pregnancy: Reexamining the Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Wani, RT (2019) Socioeconomic status scales- modified Kuppuswamy and Udai Pareekh’s scale updated for 2019. J Family Med Prim Care 8, 1846–1849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Battaglia, FC & Lubchenco, LO (1967) A practical classification of newborn infants by weight and gestational age. J Pediatr 71, 159–163.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lawrence, EJ (2006) Part 1: a matter of size: evaluating the growth-restricted neonate. Adv Neonatal Care 6, 313–322.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fomon, SJ, Haschke, F, Ziegler, EE, et al. (1982) Body composition of reference children from birth to age 10 years. Am J Clin Nutr 35, 1169–1175.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fomon, SJ & Nelson, SE (2002) Body composition of the male and female reference infants. Annu Rev Nutr 22, 1–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
WHO/UNICEF/USAID/AED/FANTA/UC Davis/IFPRI (2010) Indicators for Assessing Infant and Young Child Feeding Practices. Part II. Measurement. https://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/infantfeeding/9789241599290/en/ (accessed 07 February 2024).Google Scholar
Ong, KK, Ahmed, ML, Emmett, PM, et al. (2000) Association between postnatal catch-up growth and obesity in childhood: prospective cohort study. BMJ 320, 967–971.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ibáñez, L, Ong, K, Dunger, DB, et al. (2006) Early development of adiposity and insulin resistance after catch-up weight gain in small-for-gestational-age children. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 91, 2153–2158.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marcovecchio, ML, Gorman, S, Watson, LPE, et al. (2020) Catch-up growth in children born small for gestational age related to body composition and metabolic risk at six years of age in the UK. Horm Res Paediatr 93, 119–127.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Breij, LM, Kerkhof, GF & Hokken-Koelega, AC (2014) Accelerated infant weight gain and risk for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease in early adulthood. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 99, 1189–1195.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leunissen, RW, Kerkhof, GF, Stijnen, T, et al. (2009) Timing and tempo of first-year rapid growth in relation to cardiovascular and metabolic risk profile in early adulthood. JAMA 301, 2234–2242.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Villar, J, Puglia, FA, Fenton, TR, et al. (2017) Body composition at birth and its relationship with neonatal anthropometric ratios: the newborn body composition study of the INTERGROWTH-21st project. Pediatr Res 82, 305–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larsson, A, Ottosson, P, Törnqvist, C, et al. (2019) Body composition and growth in full-term small for gestational age and large for gestational age Swedish infants assessed with air displacement plethysmography at birth and at 3–4 months of age. PLoS One 14, e0207978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Fluiter, KS, van Beijsterveldt, IALP, Goedegebuure, WJ, et al. (2020) Longitudinal body composition assessment in healthy term-born infants until 2 years of age using ADP and DXA with vacuum cushion. Eur J Clin Nutr 74, 642–650.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Andersen, GS, Girma, T, Wells, JC, et al. (2013) Body composition from birth to 6 mo of age in Ethiopian infants: reference data obtained by air-displacement plethysmography. Am J ClinNutr 98(4), 885–894.Google ScholarPubMed
Carberry, AE, Colditz, PB & Lingwood, BE (2010) Body composition from birth to 4·5 months in infants born to non-obese women. Pediatr Res 68, 84–88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fields, DA, Gilchrist, JM, Catalano, PM, et al. (2011) Longitudinal body composition data in exclusively breast-fed infants: a multicenter study. Obesity (Silver Spring) 19, 1887–1891.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tanner, JM (1994) Growth from birth to two: a critical review. Acta Med Auxologica 26, 7–45.Google Scholar
Bouferoua, F, El Mokhtar Khiari, M, Benhalla, N, et al. (2023) Predictive factors of catch-up growth in term, small for gestational age infants: a two-year prospective observational study in Algeria. J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab 36, 842–850.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jain, V, Kumar, B & Khatak, S (2021) Catch-up and catch-down growth in term healthy Indian infants from birth to two years: a prospective cohort study. Indian Pediatr 58, 325–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Kumar et al. supplementary material 1

Kumar et al. supplementary material
Download Kumar et al. supplementary material 1(File)
File 18.8 KB
Supplementary material: File

Kumar et al. supplementary material 2

Kumar et al. supplementary material
Download Kumar et al. supplementary material 2(File)
File 278.9 KB