Maternal smoking during pregnancy increases the risk of obesity in the offspring. Not much is known about the associations with other measures of body composition. We assessed the associations of maternal smoking during pregnancy with the development of subcutaneous fat mass measured as peripheral and central skinfold thickness measurements in early childhood, in a population-based prospective cohort study from early fetal life onward in the city of Rotterdam, The Netherlands. The study was performed in 907 mothers and their children at the ages of 1.5, 6 and 24 months. As compared to non-smoking mothers, mothers who continued smoking during pregnancy were more likely to have a younger age and a lower educational level. Their children had a lower birth weight, higher risk of small size for gestational age and were breastfed for a shorter duration (P-values <0.01). We did not observe differences in peripheral, central and total subcutaneous fat mass between the offspring of non-smoking mothers, mothers who smoked in first trimester only and mothers who continued smoking during pregnancy (P > 0.05). Also, the reported number of cigarettes smoked by mothers in both first and third trimester of pregnancy were not associated with peripheral, central and total subcutaneous fat mass in the offspring at the ages of 1.5, 6 and 24 months. Our findings suggest that fetal exposure to cigarette smoke during pregnancy does not influence subcutaneous fat mass in early childhood. Follow-up studies are needed in children at older ages and to identify associations of maternal smoking during pregnancy with other measures of body composition.

, , , ,
doi.org/10.1007/s10654-010-9544-3, hdl.handle.net/1765/25506
European Journal of Epidemiology
Erasmus MC: University Medical Center Rotterdam

Durmus, B., Ay, L., Hokken-Koelega, A., Raat, H., Hofman, A., Steegers-Theunissen, R., & Jaddoe, V. (2011). Maternal smoking during pregnancy and subcutaneous fat mass in early childhood. The Generation R Study. European Journal of Epidemiology, 26(4), 295–304. doi:10.1007/s10654-010-9544-3