Literature DB >> 9495526

Effect of long-term unilateral activity on bone mineral density of female junior tennis players.

H Haapasalo1, P Kannus, H Sievänen, M Pasanen, K Uusi-Rasi, A Heinonen, P Oja, I Vuori.   

Abstract

High peak bone mass in early adulthood is an important protective factor against osteoporotic fractures in later life, but little is known about the effects of exercise on growing bone. The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to determine at which state of maturity (Tanner stage), the areal bone mineral density (BMD) differences between the playing and nonplaying arms of junior tennis players become obvious, and to clarify in each developmental stage which training and background variables, if any, could explain the interindividual differences in bones' response to mechanical loading. Ninety-one 7- to 17-year-old female tennis players and 58 healthy female controls were measured. In each Tanner stage, differences in BMD in playing and nonplaying (dominant and nondominant) arms (proximal humerus, humeral shaft, and distal radius) and BMD of the lumbar spine and nondominant distal radius were compared between the controls and players. Within each Tanner stage of players, the associations between training and background variables and BMD differences were analyzed with Spearman rank correlation coefficients. In players, BMD differences between the playing and nonplaying arms were significant (P < 0.05- < 0.001) in all Tanner stages, with the mean difference ranging from 1.6 to 15.7%. In controls, these dominant-to-nondominant arm differences were clearly smaller (ranging from -0.2 to 4.6%), but significant at some measured sites. In comparison with the relative side-to-side arm differences between the players and controls (i.e., examination of the training effect), the mean difference was not obvious and significant until the adolescent growth spurt (i.e., the girls in Tanner stage III with a mean age of 12.6 years). In the lumbar spine, significant BMD differences between players and controls were not found until Tanner stage IV (mean age 13.5 years; 8.7%, P < 0.05) and V (mean age 15.5 years; 12.4%, P < 0.05). In a nonloaded site of the skeleton (nondominant distal radius), no significant BMD differences were found between the players and controls in any Tanner stage. In the correlation analysis, the Tanner I and II players (mean ages 9.4 and 10.8 years) showed no significant associations between any of the predictive variables and the side-to-side BMD differences, while in Tanner stages III, IV, and V, such associations could be found; the total amount of training hours during the playing career and the number of training sessions per week showed a significant and systematic correlation (rs ranging from 0.43 to 0.80) with the side-to-side BMD differences in several measured bone sites. In conclusion, this study suggests that in a majority of female junior tennis players, the benefit of unilateral activity on bone density does not become clearly evident until the adolescent growth spurt or Tanner stage III. The total amount of training during the player's career and the current training frequency (sessions per week) seem to best explain the training effect on bone tissue, leaving, however, room for speculation on the still unknown factors that modulate the loading response of a growing bone.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9495526     DOI: 10.1359/jbmr.1998.13.2.310

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Miner Res        ISSN: 0884-0431            Impact factor:   6.741


  49 in total

Review 1.  The prepubertal years: a uniquely opportune stage of growth when the skeleton is most responsive to exercise?

Authors:  S L Bass
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 11.136

Review 2.  Why rest stimulates bone formation: a hypothesis based on complex adaptive phenomenon.

Authors:  Ted S Gross; Sandra L Poliachik; Brandon J Ausk; David A Sanford; Blair A Becker; Sundar Srinivasan
Journal:  Exerc Sport Sci Rev       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 6.230

Review 3.  Is there a critical period for bone response to weight-bearing exercise in children and adolescents? a systematic review.

Authors:  K J MacKelvie; K M Khan; H A McKay
Journal:  Br J Sports Med       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 13.800

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

Authors:  Fatima Baptista; Ana Varela; Luis B Sardinha
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-09-09       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  Skeletal effects of long-term caloric restriction in rhesus monkeys.

Authors:  Ricki J Colman; T Mark Beasley; David B Allison; Richard Weindruch
Journal:  Age (Dordr)       Date:  2011-12-22

6.  Bone mineral density and body composition of South African cricketers.

Authors:  Lisa K Micklesfield; Janine Gray; Mogammad S Taliep
Journal:  J Bone Miner Metab       Date:  2011-09-21       Impact factor: 2.626

7.  Comparison of spine and femur reference data in native Chinese women from different regions of China.

Authors:  Xian-Ping Wu; Er-Yuan Liao; Ru-Chun Dai; Peng-Fei Shan; Tuan-Yu Fang; Xiang-Hang Luo; Yin-Zhen Pi; Yebin Jiang
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2005-03-22       Impact factor: 4.507

8.  Habitual use of the primate forelimb is reflected in the material properties of subchondral bone in the distal radius.

Authors:  Kristian J Carlson; Biren A Patel
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 2.610

9.  Short-term and long-term site-specific effects of tennis playing on trabecular and cortical bone at the distal radius.

Authors:  Gaële Ducher; Nicolas Tournaire; Anne Meddahi-Pellé; Claude-Laurent Benhamou; Daniel Courteix
Journal:  J Bone Miner Metab       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 2.626

10.  Aggravation of inflammatory response by costimulation with titanium particles and mechanical perturbations in osteoblast- and macrophage-like cells.

Authors:  Heon Goo Lee; Anny Hsu; Hana Goto; Saqib Nizami; Jonathan H Lee; Edwin R Cadet; Peter Tang; Roya Shaji; Chandhanarat Chandhanayinyong; Seok Hyun Kweon; Daniel S Oh; Hesham Tawfeek; Francis Y Lee
Journal:  Am J Physiol Cell Physiol       Date:  2012-12-19       Impact factor: 4.249

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.