4.6 Article

Associations between components of the metabolic syndrome versus bone mineral density and vertebral fractures in patients with type 2 diabetes

Journal

BONE
Volume 45, Issue 2, Pages 174-179

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2009.05.003

Keywords

The metabolic syndrome; Visceral fat accumulation; Bone mineral density; Vertebral fractures; Type 2 diabetes mellitus

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The association of bone with the metabolic syndrome and its features. visceral fat accumulation or insulin resistance, remains unclear. We determined visceral and subcutaneous fat areas (V and S) by computed tomography on 187 men (28-83 years) and 125 postmenopausal women (46-82 years) with type 2 diabetes. Men whose V was 100 cm(2) or more had significantly lower urinary N-terminal cross-linked telopeptide of type-I collagen (p = 0.005), higher femoral neck bone mineral density (FN-BMD) (p = 0.004), and lower prevalence of vertebral fractures (VFs) (p = 0.04) than controls. Fat mass, V, S, and lean body mass positively correlated with FN-BMD in men and with lumbar (L) and FN-BMD in women. When adjusted for weight, these correlations became negative. Urinary C-peptide positively correlated with FN-BMD in both genders. Multivariate logistic regression analysis adjusted for age, height, weight, L-BMD, duration of diabetes, and diabetes therapies identified V in men and urinary C-peptide in women as factors inversely associated with the presence of VFs [odds ratio (OR) = 0.61 per SD increase, p = 0.04, and OR = 0.32, p = 0.01, respectively]. These findings suggest that, of the components of the metabolic syndrome, body fat in gravity and hyperinsulinemia could increase FN-BMD in diabetic subjects. Visceral fat in men and hyperinsulinemia in women may protect against VI's independent of weight, L-BMD, diabetes duration, or therapies. (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available