4.2 Article

Observational study of caloric and nutrient intake, bone density, and body composition in infants and children with spinal muscular atrophy type I

期刊

NEUROMUSCULAR DISORDERS
卷 22, 期 11, 页码 966-973

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.nmd.2012.04.008

关键词

Spinal muscular atrophy type I; Body composition; Bone density; Nutrient and caloric intake; Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry; Growth status; Nutrient deficiencies

资金

  1. SMA Angels Charity, Inc.
  2. NIH, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [R01-HD054599]
  3. National Center for Research Resources [UL1RR025764]
  4. SMA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Clinical experience supports a critical role for nutrition in patients with spinal muscular atrophy (SMA). Three-day dietary intake records were analyzed for 156 visits in 47 SMA type I patients, 25 males and 22 females, ages 1 month to 13 years (median 9.8 months) and compared to dietary reference intakes for gender and age along with anthropometric measures and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) data. Using standardized growth curves, twelve patients met criteria for failure to thrive (FTT) with weight for age <3rd percentile; eight met criteria based on weight for height. Percentage of body fat mass was not correlated with weight for height and weight for age across percentile categories. DEXA analysis further demonstrated that SMA type I children have higher fat mass and lower fat free mass than healthy peers (p < 0.001). DEXA and dietary analysis indicates a strong correlation with magnesium intake and bone mineral density (r = 0.65, p < 0.001). Average caloric intake for 1-3 years old was 68.8 +/- 15.8 kcal/kg - 67% of peers' recommended intake. Children with SMA type I may have lower caloric requirements than healthy age-matched peers, increasing risk for over and undernourished states and deficiencies of critical nutrients. Standardized growth charts may overestimate FTT status in SMA type I. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据