Literature DB >> 22886589

Body composition in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Manuel Ramírez1, Juana Martínez-Llorens, Juan Francisco Sanchez, Joan Bagó, Antoni Molina, Joaquim Gea, Enric Cáceres.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: A controlled prospective cross-sectional case study.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate body mass index (BMI) and corporal composition in girls with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) and compare them with a normal population matched by sex and age. There is controversy as to whether there are real anthropometric alterations in patients with AIS. Relative to the weight or the BMI, some studies find differences and other studies do not detect them. AIS and anorexia nervosa (AN) make their debut during adolescence and both may be associated with an alteration of their subjective physical perception. Some authors propose a link between AIS and AN supported both by an alteration of physical perception and lower BMI. No studies on body composition in AIS have been published.
METHODS: Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patient surgery candidates during 2008 were studied. Body composition was evaluated using the bioelectrical impedance analysis (Bodystat, Isle of Man, UK). A study population of more than 5,000 patients that was published by Kyle et al. (Nutrition 17:534-541, 2001) was chosen as a control (group 1). Another control group (group 2) of healthy volunteers matched by sex and age was selected among a school age and university population in Barcelona, Spain. A variance analysis was used to analyze differences between the mean values of the control group 1, the European control group, and the AIS patient surgery candidates (Epiinfo 6.2001). Comparisons between the AIS patients and control group 2 were performed with the T Student test of unpaired samples using the SPSS 15.0 (Statistical Package Social Science) software.
RESULTS: Twenty-seven women with a mean age of 17.4 years. BMI was 18.9 kg/m(2) (SD 1.7; 95 % CI 18.31-19.73). In the variance analysis, a significant difference between AIS and group 1 in BMI was observed (21.0 vs. 18.9, p = 0.000004); fat-free mass (FFM = 42.6 vs. 38.9, p = 0.0000009) and fat mass (FM = 15.6 vs. 13.7, p = 0.03). Significant differences in BMI (22.13 vs. 18.9, p = 0.001; 95 % CI difference 1.85-4.60), fat mass index (FMi = 7.17 vs. 4.97, p = 0.000; 95 % CI difference 1.36-3.05) and fat-free mass index (FFMi = 14.95 vs. 13.09, p = 0.001; 95 % CI difference 0.26-1.86) between AIS and group 2 were also seen.
CONCLUSION: The conclusion is that there is a real alteration of body composition in AIS. The BMI, FFMi and FMi are lower than in the general population in the series under study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22886589      PMCID: PMC3555626          DOI: 10.1007/s00586-012-2465-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  23 in total

1.  Correction of body height in scoliotic patients using ISIS scanning.

Authors:  A J Carr; R J Jefferson; I Weisz; A R Turner-Smith
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1989-02       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  The proportion of legs to trunk in girls with idiopathic structural scoliosis.

Authors:  S Willner
Journal:  Acta Orthop Scand       Date:  1975-04

Review 3.  Epidemiology of the eating disorders.

Authors:  L K Hsu
Journal:  Psychiatr Clin North Am       Date:  1996-12

4.  Skeletal and body-composition effects of anorexia nervosa.

Authors:  R B Mazess; H S Barden; E S Ohlrich
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  1990-09       Impact factor: 7.045

5.  Indications of disordered eating behaviour in adolescent patients with idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  F M Smith; G Latchford; R M Hall; P A Millner; R A Dickson
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2002-04

6.  A longitudinal study of growth velocity and development of secondary gender characteristics versus onset of idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  M Loncar-Dusek; M Pećina; Z Prebeg
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1991-09       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Abnormal peri-pubertal anthropometric measurements and growth pattern in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a study of 598 patients.

Authors:  Catherine Siu King Cheung; Warren Tak Keung Lee; Yee Kit Tse; Sheng Ping Tang; Kwong Man Lee; Xia Guo; Lin Qin; Jack Chun Yiu Cheng
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2003-09-15       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  The prediction of curve progression in untreated idiopathic scoliosis during growth.

Authors:  J E Lonstein; J M Carlson
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1984-09       Impact factor: 5.284

9.  Growth and maturation of adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  D S Drummond; E J Rogala
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1980 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  An evaluation of infant growth: the use and interpretation of anthropometry in infants. WHO Working Group on Infant Growth.

Authors: 
Journal:  Bull World Health Organ       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 9.408

View more
  18 in total

1.  Anthropometric characteristics, high prevalence of undernutrition and weight loss: impact on outcomes in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis after spinal fusion.

Authors:  Roslyn C Tarrant; Mary Nugent; Anne P Nugent; Joseph M Queally; David P Moore; Patrick J Kiely
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-10-29       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Poor outcomes and satisfaction in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery: the relevance of the body mass index and self-image.

Authors:  Daniel Pérez-Prieto; Juan Francisco Sánchez-Soler; Juana Martínez-Llorens; Sergi Mojal; Joan Bagó; Enric Cáceres; Manuel Ramírez
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-07-31       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Fasting total ghrelin levels are increased in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Jérôme Sales de Gauzy; Isabelle Gennero; Olivier Delrous; Jean-Pierre Salles; Benoit Lepage; Franck Accadbled
Journal:  Scoliosis       Date:  2015-11-30

4.  Gravity-induced coronal plane joint moments in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Bethany E Keenan; Graeme J Pettet; Maree T Izatt; Geoffrey N Askin; Robert D Labrom; Mark J Pearcy; Clayton Adam
Journal:  Scoliosis       Date:  2015-12-17

5.  Identification of candidate diagnostic biomarkers for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using UPLC/QTOF-MS analysis: a first report of lipid metabolism profiles.

Authors:  Zhi-jian Sun; Hong-mei Jia; Gui-xing Qiu; Chao Zhou; Shigong Guo; Jian-guo Zhang; Jian-xiong Shen; Yu Zhao; Zhong-mei Zou
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-03-01       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Body composition in males with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a case-control study with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry.

Authors:  Weijun Wang; Zhiwei Wang; Zezhang Zhu; Feng Zhu; Yong Qiu
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2016-02-29       Impact factor: 2.362

7.  Understanding the role of the immune system in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: Immunometabolic CONnections to Scoliosis (ICONS) study protocol.

Authors:  M Constantine Samaan; Paul Missiuna; Devin Peterson; Lehana Thabane
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-07-08       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  Understanding muscle-immune interactions in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a feasibility study.

Authors:  Srikesh Rudrapatna; Devin Peterson; Paul Missiuna; Ishan Aditya; Brian Drew; Nicola Sahar; Lehana Thabane; M Constantine Samaan
Journal:  Pilot Feasibility Stud       Date:  2017-12-05

9.  Minodronate treatment improves low bone mass and reduces progressive thoracic scoliosis in a mouse model of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Hironori Tanabe; Yoichi Aota; Yasuteru Yamaguchi; Kanichiro Kaneko; Sousuke Imai; Masaki Takahashi; Masataka Taguri; Tomoyuki Saito
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-08-23       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Association of Body Composition with Curve Severity in Children and Adolescents with Idiopathic Scoliosis (IS).

Authors:  Edyta Matusik; Jacek Durmala; Pawel Matusik
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2016-01-28       Impact factor: 5.717

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.