4.6 Article

Protective effect of vitamins K2 and D3 on prednisolone-induced loss of bone mineral density in the lumbar spine

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF KIDNEY DISEASES
卷 43, 期 1, 页码 53-60

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2003.09.013

关键词

osteoporosis; prednisolone; vitamin D; vitamin K

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Although vitamin K-2 has been shown to prevent prednisolone-Induced loss of bone mineral density of the lumbar spine in patients with chronic glomerulonephritis, the magnitude of this effect remains to be clarified. The aim of this prospective study is to compare the protective effect of vitamin K-2 with that of vitamin D-3 on prednisolone-induced loss of bone mineral density in patients with chronic glomerulonephritis. Methods: Sixty patients (28 men, 32 women) were randomly divided into 4 groups (n = 15 each group): control (group C), vitamin D-3 alone (alfacalcidol, 0.5 mug/d; group D), vitamin K-2 alone (menatetrenone, 45 mg/d; group K), and vitamins D-3 plus K-2 (group D + K). Alfacalcidol and menatetrenone therapy were started at the same time as prednisolone. Bone mineral density of the lumbar spine (L-2 to L-4) was determined by means of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, and various biochemical parameters of calcium and bone homeostasis were assessed before and at the end of week 8 of treatment. Results: Treatment with prednisolone alone caused loss of bone mineral density, which could be fully prevented in groups D, K, and D + K. However, marked reductions in levels of several biochemical markers of both bone formation and resorption also were observed in all groups. The preventive effect in groups K and D + K on loss of bone mineral density induced by prednisolone was similar to that in group D. The elevation in serum calcium levels observed in group D was attenuated in group D + K. Conclusion: Protective effects of vitamin K-2 or vitamins D-3 and K-2 on prednisolone-induced loss of bone mineral density are similar to that of vitamin D-3.

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

4.6
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