Clinical endocrinology · 2017
Bone mineral density in familial partial lipodystrophy.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Fernández-Pombo Antía, Ossandon-Otero Javier A, Guillín-Amarelle Cristina, Sánchez-Iglesias Sofía, Castro Ana I, González-Méndez Blanca, Rodríguez-García Silvia, Rodriguez-Cañete Leticia, Casanueva Felipe F, Araújo-Vilar David
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Type 1 and type 2 familial partial lipodystrophies (FPLD) are characterized by the loss or increase in subcutaneous fat in certain body regions, as well as metabolic disorders. Higher muscle volume and mass have also been described. However, so far, possible bone involvement has not been studied. The aim of this study was to evaluate bone mineral density (BMD) in patients with type 1 and type 2 FPLD.
METHODS: A total of 143 women were selected and distributed into three groups (17 women with FPLD2, 82 women with FPLD1 and 44 nonlipodystrophic obese female controls). A thorough history and physical examination were carried out on all subjects, as well as the measurement of anthropometric features. BMD along with fat and fat-free mass (FFM) were determined by DXA (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry). Statistical analyses, primarily using the χ2 , ANOVA and ANCOVA tests, were performed, using age, height, fat and FFM as covariables.
RESULTS: After eliminating the possible influences of age, height, fat and FFM, we observed that there were no significant differences in total BMD between patients with FPLD and the control group, showing total BMD values of 1.092 ± 0.037 g/cm2 in the FPLD2 group, 1.158 ± 0.013 g/cm2 in the FPLD1 group and 1.173 ± 0.018 g/cm2 in the control group (P = .194). Similarly, no significant differences were found in segmental BMD.
CONCLUSIONS: Unlike in other types of laminopathy in which bone is affected, in the case of FPLD, there are no differences in BMD compared to nonlipodystrophic subjects.
METHODS: A total of 143 women were selected and distributed into three groups (17 women with FPLD2, 82 women with FPLD1 and 44 nonlipodystrophic obese female controls). A thorough history and physical examination were carried out on all subjects, as well as the measurement of anthropometric features. BMD along with fat and fat-free mass (FFM) were determined by DXA (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry). Statistical analyses, primarily using the χ2 , ANOVA and ANCOVA tests, were performed, using age, height, fat and FFM as covariables.
RESULTS: After eliminating the possible influences of age, height, fat and FFM, we observed that there were no significant differences in total BMD between patients with FPLD and the control group, showing total BMD values of 1.092 ± 0.037 g/cm2 in the FPLD2 group, 1.158 ± 0.013 g/cm2 in the FPLD1 group and 1.173 ± 0.018 g/cm2 in the control group (P = .194). Similarly, no significant differences were found in segmental BMD.
CONCLUSIONS: Unlike in other types of laminopathy in which bone is affected, in the case of FPLD, there are no differences in BMD compared to nonlipodystrophic subjects.