Endocrine Abstracts

Objective: Postmenopausal period in women is associated with the accelerated bone loss, contributing to the development of osteoporosis, fractures and decreasing of quality and duration of life. The metabolic syndrome (MS), which includes obesity, dyslipidemia, hyperglycemia, and hypertension, is a major public health problem also.

The purpose of our study was to reveal associations between tissue body composition, compounds of MS and BMD in postmenopausal women.

Design & method: The sample consisted of 90 postmenopausal 60–69 years old women (age: mean=63.9; S.D.=0.4); duration of menopause: mean=14.1; S.D.=0.9). MS was considered according to IDF (2005 years) criteria. Total body, lumbar spine, femoral neck, ulna radius bone mineral density (BMD), lean and fat mass distribution were measured by dual-energy X-ray absortiometry were compared for the cohorts with and without the MS. Other parameters including age, weight, height, the level of glucose, lipids were taken into account. Data were analyzed using Statistical Package 6.0 (Statsoft).

Results: Findings revealed that 55 (61.1%) of these postmenopausal women had MS. In patients with and without MS compared, fat mass was higher in the former group In patients with and without MS compared, BMD was lower in the former group at femoral neck (0.77±0.02; 0.89±0.03, respectively; F=10.2; P=0.002), ulna radius (0.57±0.02; 0.64±0.02, respectively; F=6.4; P=0.01).and at different body regions also. Lean mass comparing didn’t show significant differences. Diabetes mellitus and hyperglycemia in subjects compared with age and body mass index matched non-diabetic subjects were associated with lower BMD. Serum concentration of triglycerides was a negative predictor of BMD. Increasing quantity of the MS components in women during the postmenopausal period had a negative correlation with BMD at every site.

Conclusion: Our findings suggest that body fat mass is not significant protective factor for BMD loss.

Declaration of interest: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project.

Funding: This research did not receive any specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sector.