Nieves Luisa Gonzalez Gonzalez

Prof. Dr. Nieves Luisa Gonzalez Gonzalez

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

38Years (1989-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
6 September 2007 in Obesity
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JBJose L. Bartha
Jose L. Bartha
PMPatricia Marín‐Segura
Patricia Marín‐Segura
NGNieves Luisa Gonzalez Gonzalez
Nieves Luisa Gonzalez Gonzalez
FWFernando Wagner
Fernando Wagner
MDManuel Aguilar Diosdado
Manuel Aguilar Diosdado
BHBlas Hervias‐Vivancos
Blas Hervias‐Vivancos
Objective: The objective was to study the relationships between ultrasound estimated visceral fat and metabolic risk factors during early pregnancy.Research Methods and Procedures: Thirty consecutive healthy pregnant women at 11 to 14 weeks of gestation were studied. Maximum subcutaneous fat thickness (SFT) and visceral fat thickness (VFT) were successfully measured by ultrasound. Fasting plasma glucose, insulin, triglycerides, total cholesterol, high‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL‐C), and blood pressure were measured. Insulin resistance was calculated by using the homeostasis model assessment (HOMA).Results: VFT significantly correlated with diastolic blood pressure (r = 0.37, p = 0.04), glycemia (r = 0.37, p = 0.04), insulinemia (r = 0.59, p = 0.001) insulin sensitivity (HOMA; r = 0.59, p = 0.001), triglycerides (r = 0.58, p = 0.03), HDL‐C (r = −0.39, p = 0.03), and total cholesterol/HDL‐C ratio (p = 0.002), whereas SFT was significantly correlated with only diastolic blood pressure (p = 0.03). VFT better significantly correlated with the metabolic risk factors than pre‐gestational BMI [r = 0.39, p = 0.03 for insulinemia, r = 0.42, p = 0.02 for insulin sensitivity (HOMA), and r = 0.49, p = 0.01 for triglycerides and not significant for the rest].Discussion: Visceral fat thickness can be easily measured by ultrasound at early pregnancy and correlates better than BMI with metabolic risk factors.

1 April 2008 in European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JBJosé L. Bartha
José L. Bartha
FBFernando Bugatto
Fernando Bugatto
RFRosa Fernández-Macías
Rosa Fernández-Macías
NGNieves Luisa Gonzalez Gonzalez
Nieves Luisa Gonzalez Gonzalez
RCRafael Comino-Delgado
Rafael Comino-Delgado
BHBlas Hervías-Vivancos
Blas Hervías-Vivancos

18 August 2011 in The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
NGNieves Luisa Gonzalez Gonzalez
Nieves Luisa Gonzalez Gonzalez
MGMaria Goya
Maria Goya
JBJordi Bellart
Jordi Bellart
JLJose Lopez
Jose Lopez
MSMaria A. Sancho
Maria A. Sancho
JBJosé L. Bartha
José L. Bartha
Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate pregnancy complications and obstetric and perinatal outcomes in women with twin pregnancy and GDM. Study Design: An observational multicentre retrospective study was performed and 534 pregnant woman and 1068 twins infants allocated into two groups, 257 with GDM and 277 controls, were studied. Main Outcome Measures: Pregnant women characteristics, hypertensive complications, preterm delivery rate, mode of delivery and birthweight were analysed. Results: Pregnant women with GDM were older (p < 0.001) and had higher body mass index (p < 0.001) than controls. GDM was associated with higher risk of prematurity in twin pregnancy (odds ratio 1.64, 95% confidence interval [1.14–2.32], p = 0.005). This association was based on the association with other pregnancy complications. Birthweight Z-scores were significantly higher in the GDM group (p = 0.02). The rate of macrosomia was higher in the GDM group (p = 0.002) and small for gestational age (SGA) babies were significantly less frequent (p = 0.03). GDM was an independent predictor of macrosomia (p = 0.006). Conclusion: The presence of GDM in twin pregnancy was associated with a higher risk of hypertensive complications, prematurity and macrosomia, but significantly reduces the risk of SGA infants. Prematurity was related to the presence of other associated pregnancy complications.

1 January 2008 in Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
NGNieves Luisa Gonzalez Gonzalez
Nieves Luisa Gonzalez Gonzalez
OROctavio Ramirez
Octavio Ramirez
JMJuan Mozas
Juan Mozas
JMJuan Melchor
Juan Melchor
HAHonorio Armas
Honorio Armas
JBJose Luis Bartha
Jose Luis Bartha
Aim. To compare pregnancy outcome and factors related to adverse perinatal outcome in women with type 1 versus type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM). Material and methods. Multicentre retrospective study. Some 404 women were studied, 257 with type 1 DM and 147 with type 2 DM. Main outcome measures were rates of prematurity, macrosomia, instrumental deliveries, congenital malformations, need for neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), and perinatal mortality. Results. There were no significant differences in pregnancy outcome between women with type 1 and type 2 DM, except for an increased rate of instrumental deliveries in women with type 1 DM. In these women, duration of diabetes was a significant predictor of caesarean delivery (OR =1.06 (1.01–1.12); p = 0.02). Chronic hypertension was positively related to prematurity (p = 0.02), and proved to be a significant predictor of birth weight lower than 2,500 g (OR =3.54 (1.4–12.49); p = 0.043) and perinatal mortality (OR =10.6 (1.15–117.6); p = 0.04). In women with type 2 DM, third trimester higher glycosylated haemoglobin was related to both prematurity (OR 4.9 (1.7–14.4; p = 0.004) and low birth weight. Macrosomia was a significant risk factor for caesarean section. First trimester glycosylated haemoglobin was related to congenital malformations and proved to be a significant predictor of perinatal mortality (OR =2.4 (1.02–5.74); p = 0.04). Conclusions. Duration of DM and chronic hypertension were the most influential factors related to adverse perinatal outcomes in women with type 1 DM, and poor metabolic control and macrosomia in women with type 2 DM.

23 September 2015 in Prenatal Diagnosis
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
WPWalter Plasencia
Walter Plasencia
EGEnrique González‐Dávila
Enrique González‐Dávila
ALAlejandra González Lorenzo
Alejandra González Lorenzo
MAMarina Armas‐González
Marina Armas‐González
EPErika Padrón
Erika Padrón
NGNieves Luisa Gonzalez Gonzalez
Nieves Luisa Gonzalez Gonzalez

1 March 2014 in Placenta
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
NGNieves Luisa Gonzalez Gonzalez
Nieves Luisa Gonzalez Gonzalez
EGEnrique González-Dávila
Enrique González-Dávila
ACA. Castro
A. Castro
EPE. Padron
E. Padron
WPW. Plasencia
W. Plasencia