4.3 Article

Association between Obesity and Bone Mineral Density by Gender and Menopausal Status

Journal

ENDOCRINOLOGY AND METABOLISM
Volume 31, Issue 4, Pages 547-558

Publisher

KOREAN ENDOCRINE SOC
DOI: 10.3803/EnM.2016.31.4.547

Keywords

Body mass index; Bone density; Obesity paradox; Gender identity; Menopause

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: We investigated whether there were gender differences in the effect of obesity on bone mineral density (BMD) based on menopausal status. Methods: We assessed 5,892 consecutive patients 20 to 91 years old who were referred for dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans. All subjects underwent a standard BMD scan of the hip (total hip and femoral neck) and lumbar spine (L1 to L4) using a DXA scan and body size assessment. Body mass index was used to categorize the subjects as normal weight, overweight, and obese. Results: BMD was higher in obese and overweight versus normal weight men, premenopausal women, and postmenopausal women. Compared to men >= 50 years and postmenopausal women with normal weight, the age-adjusted odds ratio of osteopenia was 0.19 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07 to 0.56) and 0.38 (95% CI, 0.29 to 0.51) for obese men >= 50 years and postmenopausal women. Corresponding summaries for osteoporosis were 0.26 (95% CI, 0.11 to 0.64) and 0.15 (95% CI, 0.11 to 0.20), respectively. Compared to men <50 years and premenopausal women with normal weight, the age-adjusted odds ratio of low bone mass was 0.22 (95% CI, 0.11 to 0.45) and 0.16 (95% CI, 0.10 to 0.26) for obese men <50 years and premenopausal women, respectively. Conclusion: Obesity is associated with BMD of the hip and lumbar spine and overweight and obese individuals have similar degrees of osteoporosis. This result was not significantly different based on gender and menopausal status, which could be an important issue for further investigation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available