Login

Join for Free!
118497 members
table of contents table of contents

The study investigated variations of bone mineral density during lactation and throughout …


Biology Articles » Reproductive Biology » Bone Mineral Changes During and After Lactation » Tables

Tables
- Bone Mineral Changes During and After Lactation

..................................................



Table 1. Demographic Characteristics

 

Characteristic Lactating without calcium supplementation (n = 135) Lactating with calcium supplementation (n = 139) Nonlactating (n = 153)

Age (y) 29 ± 3 30 ± 3 30 ± 4
Height (cm) 166 ± 7 165 ± 8 168 ± 6
Weight (kg) 69 ± 8 67 ± 9 67 ± 10
Body mass index (kg/m2) 25.1 ± 1.8 24.4 ± 1.7 25.2 ± 1.4
Parity 1.4 ± 0.8 1.6 ± 1 1.7 ± 0.9
Baseline BMD at radius (g/cm2) 0.469 ± 0.009 0.489 ± 0.008 0.492 ± 0.008
Baseline BMD at spine (g/cm2) 1.239 ± 0.018 1.220 ± 0.014 1.211 ± 0.025

BMD = bone mineral density.
Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation.

..................................................


Table 2. Bone Mineral Density Percent Changes in the Spine* and Radius{dagger}

 

Calcium status and test location 3 mo 6 mo 7 mo 12 mo 18 mo

Lactating without calcium supplementation
    Spine -3.7 ± 0.3 -4.4 ± 0.4 -3.4 ± 0.3 +0.4 ± 0.3 +1.8 ± 0.4
    Radius -1.7 ± 0.2 -2.2 ± 0.4 -1.6 ± 0.3 +0.5 ± 0.3 +1.3 ± 0.4
Lactating with calcium supplementation
    Spine -3.4 ± 0.4 -4.0 ± 0.3 -2.9 ± 0.4 +0.8 ± 0.3 +2.0 ± 0.4
    Radius -1.4 ± 0.3 -2.0 ± 0.3 -1.3 ± 0.4 +0.3 ± 0.3 +1.3 ± 0.4
Nonlactating
    Spine +0.8 ± 0.4 +1.4 ± 0.3   +2.1 ± 0.3 +1.9 ± 0.4
    Radius +0.4 ± 0.2 +0.9 ± 0.3   +1.1 ± 0.4 +1.1 ± 0.3

Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation.
* Spine mineral density: Model r2 = 0.66, model P = .001; study group P = .001 (lactating with calcium versus lactating without calcium P = .162; nonlactating versus lactating without calcium P = .001; lactating with calcium versus nonlactating P = .001); time P = .001 (Bonferroni correction applied).
{dagger} Radius mineral density: Model r2 = 0.59, model P = .001; study group P = .001 (lactating with calcium versus lactating without calcium P = .162; nonlactating versus lactating without calcium P = .001; lactating with calcium versus nonlactating P = .001); time P = .001 (Bonferroni correction applied).


..................................................

Table 3. Bone Mineral Density Percent Changes in Lactating Women According to Return of Menstruation

 

  3 mo
           
  Spine Radius Mo of amenorrhea   6 mo 7 mo 12 mo 18 mo

Lactating without calcium supplementation -3.7 ± 0.4 -1.7 ± 0.4   Spine -3.0 ± 0.3 -2.0 ± 0.4 +0.8 ± 0.3 +1.9 ± 0.4
(n = 135) (n = 135) (n = 135) <=5   (n = 77) (n = 77) (n = 77) (n = 65)
        Radius -1.3 ± 0.3 -0.6 ± 0.4 +0.7 ± 0.3 +1.5 ± 0.4
          (n = 77) (n = 77) (n = 77) (n = 65)
        Spine -5.8 ± 0.4 -4.8 ± 0.3 -0.4 ± 0.4 +1.7 ± 0.3
      >5   (n = 58) (n = 58) (n = 58) (n = 48)
        Radius -3.1 ± 0.4 -2.6 ± 0.3 -0.6 ± 0.4 +1.1 ± 0.3
          (n = 58) (n = 58) (n = 58) (n = 48)
Lactating with calcium supplementation -3.4 ± 0.3 - 1.4 ± 0.3   Spine -2.6 ± 0.4 -1.8 ± 0.3 -1.0 ± 0.3 +2.2 ± 0.4
(n = 139) (n = 139) (n = 139) <=5   (n = 80) (n = 80) (n = 80) (n = 70)
        Radius -1.0 ± 0.4 -0.2 ± 0.3 +0.8 ± 0.3 +1.1 ± 0.4
          (n = 80) (n = 80) (n = 80) (n = 70)
        Spine -5.4 ± 0.3 -4.1 ± 0.4 -0.2 ± 0.3 +1.8 ± 0.3
      >5   (n = 59) (n = 59) (n = 59) (n = 51)
        Radius -3.0 ± 0.3 -2.4 ± 0.4 -0.2 ± 0.3 +1.2 ± 0.3
          (n = 59) (n = 59) (n = 59) (n = 51)

Values are means ± standard deviation.
Spine mineral density: Model r2 = 0.80, model P = .001; calcium supplementation P = .252; menses resumption P = .001; time P = .001, qualitative interaction present.
Radius mineral density: Model r2 = 0.70, model P = .001; calcium supplementation P = .001; menses resumption P = .001; time P = .001, no interaction retained. Subgroups pairwise comparison in text.

..................................................

Source: Obstetrics & Gynecology 1999;94:52-56.


rating: 1.50 from 4 votes | updated on: 29 Dec 2006 | views: 3141 |

Rate article:







excellent!bad…