Placental weight and birthweight: does the association differ between pregnancies with and without preeclampsia?

Pregnancy adverse outcomes related to pregravid body mass index and gestational weight gain, according to the presence or not of gestational diabetes mellitus: A retrospective observational study

“…As the partial population attributable fraction of GDM, BMI and GWG was < 50%, other factors may be important contributors to LGA infants. Similar to the findings of others, our data indicate that, while ethnicity [15,16], a familial history of diabetes and personal history of a child with macrosomia [15,29] suggest genetic causes of macrosomia, smoking habits [6], multiparity and preeclampsia [31] are also possible, non-genetic causes of macrosomia. All these factors may play a role through epigenetic mechanisms, with fetal epigenetic programming of adipokines involved when considering BMI and GWG [32].…”

High placental index and poor pregnancy outcomes: a retrospective study of 18 386 pregnancies

“…A high placental index has been positively correlated with severe villitis [3] and with tobacco smoke habits [4], and negatively correlated in mice also with male alcoholism [5] and ionizing radiation [6]. In pregnancies affected by preeclampsia a relative enlargement of the placenta when compared with fetal size has been seen [7]. However, placental index has been studied in twin pregnancies complicated by pre-eclampsia without finding significant results [8,9].…”

Placental volume, vasculature and calcification in pregnancies complicated by pre-eclampsia and intra-uterine growth restriction

“…This 218 is most likely due to the difference in the number of cases in both 219 groups. It has also been shown that while pre-eclampsia is mainly 220 associated with IUGR and small placentae, it can be associated with 221 a large placenta [18]. What may be more relevant is placental 222 weight at delivery and the feto-placental ratio (FPR).…”