Literature DB >> 15365695

Bone mineral mass in males and females with and without Down syndrome.

Fatima Baptista1, Ana Varela, Luis B Sardinha.   

Abstract

Previous bone comparison studies between subjects with and without Down syndrome (DS) were performed using bone mineral density (BMD) as the dependent variable, and mainly focused on lumbar spine region. The purpose of this study was to compare bone mineral mass adjusted for bone and body size, in limbs, lumbar spine, and femoral neck between males and females with and without DS. Subjects were 66 females (33 with DS) and 68 males (34 with DS) aged 14-40 years. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to analyze the main and interaction effects of gender and condition on bone mineral mass. For this purpose, adjusted bone mineral content (BMC) (for bone area, height, and age), volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD) (for age), and composite indices of femoral neck strength (for age), were used as the dependent variables, corrected additionally for body composition variables selected by regression analysis. ANCOVA revealed lower lumbar spine vBMD in DS than in control subjects with (-5%, P = 0.013), or without body weight adjustments (-6%, P = 0.003). In femoral neck, the mean of each strength measure was also lower in DS than in control subjects. Mean differences between groups were, with and without additional adjustments for fat mass, respectively, -8% (P = 0.009), and -13% (P < 0.001) for compressive strength, -11% (P = 0.036), and -16% (P = 0.004) for bending strength, and -7% (P = 0.031), and -11% (P = 0.002) for impact strength. These lumbar spine and femoral neck differences between groups were highest in young adults (> 20 years) and not significant in adolescents. No interaction effect was observed between gender and condition. In conclusion, DS was shown to be a risk factor for low vBMD in lumbar spine, and for diminished bone strength relative to the loads that the femoral neck must bear. Body composition did not reach statistical significance as predictor of bone differences in these sites between subjects with and without DS, suggesting that other factors may be involved in this detrimental bone status, particularly in young adults compared with adolescents.

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15365695     DOI: 10.1007/s00198-004-1687-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Osteoporos Int        ISSN: 0937-941X            Impact factor:   4.507


  46 in total

Review 1.  Bone matters: are density increases necessary to reduce fracture risk?

Authors:  K G Faulkner
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 6.741

Review 2.  Clinical review 117: Hormonal determinants and disorders of peak bone mass in children.

Authors:  L A Soyka; W P Fairfield; A Klibanski
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 5.958

Review 3.  Relationships among body mass, its components, and bone.

Authors:  I R Reid
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 4.398

4.  Bone mass, gonadal function and biochemical assessment in young men with trisomy 21.

Authors:  Athanasios Sakadamis; Nickoletta Angelopoulou; Chrysoula Matziari; Vasilios Papameletiou; Vasilios Souftas
Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol       Date:  2002-01-10       Impact factor: 2.435

5.  Why do marathon runners have less bone than weight lifters? A vital-biomechanical view and explanation.

Authors:  H M Frost
Journal:  Bone       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 4.398

6.  Fat or lean tissue mass: which one is the major determinant of bone mineral mass in healthy postmenopausal women?

Authors:  Z Chen; T G Lohman; W A Stini; C Ritenbaugh; M Aickin
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 6.741

7.  Measured and predicted bone mineral content in healthy boys and girls aged 6-18 years: adjustment for body size and puberty.

Authors:  J T Warner; F J Cowan; F D Dunstan; W D Evans; D K Webb; J W Gregory
Journal:  Acta Paediatr       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 2.299

8.  Uncritical use of bone mineral density in absorptiometry may lead to size-related artifacts in the identification of bone mineral determinants.

Authors:  A Prentice; T J Parsons; T J Cole
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 7.045

9.  Femoral morphology and cross-sectional geometry of adult myostatin-deficient mice.

Authors:  M W Hamrick; A C McPherron; C O Lovejoy; J Hudson
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 4.398

10.  Bone mineral density in children with Down's syndrome detected by dual photon absorptiometry.

Authors:  C H Kao; C C Chen; S J Wang; S H Yeh
Journal:  Nucl Med Commun       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 1.690

View more
  31 in total

1.  Diabetes and femoral neck strength: findings from the Hip Strength Across the Menopausal Transition Study.

Authors:  Shinya Ishii; Jane A Cauley; Carolyn J Crandall; Preethi Srikanthan; Gail A Greendale; Mei-Hua Huang; Michelle E Danielson; Arun S Karlamangla
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2011-11-09       Impact factor: 5.958

2.  Cortical and trabecular bone at the radius and tibia in male and female adolescents with Down syndrome: a peripheral quantitative computed tomography (pQCT) study.

Authors:  A González-Agüero; G Vicente-Rodríguez; A Gómez-Cabello; J A Casajús
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2012-06-09       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Disruption of bone development and homeostasis by trisomy in Ts65Dn Down syndrome mice.

Authors:  Joshua D Blazek; Anna Gaddy; Rachel Meyer; Randall J Roper; Jiliang Li
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2010-09-24       Impact factor: 4.398

4.  Effect of whole body vibration training on bone mineral density and bone quality in adolescents with Down syndrome: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  A Matute-Llorente; A González-Agüero; A Gómez-Cabello; H Olmedillas; G Vicente-Rodríguez; J A Casajús
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2015-05-21       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  Effect of whole-body vibration training on bone mass in adolescents with and without Down syndrome: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  A Matute-Llorente; A González-Agüero; A Gómez-Cabello; J Tous-Fajardo; G Vicente-Rodríguez; J A Casajús
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2015-07-23       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  Bone mineral density in adults with Down syndrome.

Authors:  A Carfì; R Liperoti; D Fusco; S Giovannini; V Brandi; D L Vetrano; E Meloni; D Mascia; E R Villani; E Manes Gravina; R Bernabei; G Onder
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2017-07-06       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  Epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG) consumption in the Ts65Dn model of Down syndrome fails to improve behavioral deficits and is detrimental to skeletal phenotypes.

Authors:  Megan Stringer; Irushi Abeysekera; Jared Thomas; Jonathan LaCombe; Kailey Stancombe; Robert J Stewart; Karl J Dria; Joseph M Wallace; Charles R Goodlett; Randall J Roper
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2017-05-03

Review 8.  Aneuploidy and skeletal health.

Authors:  Archana Kamalakar; John R Harris; Kent D McKelvey; Larry J Suva
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 5.096

9.  C-reactive protein, bone strength, and nine-year fracture risk: data from the Study of Women's Health Across the Nation (SWAN).

Authors:  Shinya Ishii; Jane A Cauley; Gail A Greendale; Carolyn J Crandall; Michelle E Danielson; Yasuyoshi Ouchi; Arun S Karlamangla
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 6.741

10.  Low bone turnover and low bone density in a cohort of adults with Down syndrome.

Authors:  K D McKelvey; T W Fowler; N S Akel; J A Kelsay; D Gaddy; G R Wenger; L J Suva
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2012-08-18       Impact factor: 4.507

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.