Back to Search Start Over

Prevalence of Morphometric Vertebral Fractures After Bariatric Surgery and Its Relationship with Bone Mineral Density and Bone Markers.

Authors :
de Holanda NCP
Silva TIAR
Cavalcante AG
Lacerda MB
de Oliveira Viena G
de Carvalho CC
Menezes KT
de Medeiros IRN
Sales MM
E Silva de Queiroz FR
de Arruda Castelo Branco Brito CG
Bandeira F
Source :
Obesity surgery [Obes Surg] 2024 Mar; Vol. 34 (3), pp. 733-740. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Jan 29.
Publication Year :
2024

Abstract

Background: Bariatric surgery (BS) can lead to bone loss and an increased fracture risk.<br />Methods: To determine the morphometric vertebral fracture (MVF) prevalence, and its relationship with bone mineral density (BMD), and biomarker's turnover after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG), we analyzed post-surgery X-rays of the spine in 80 patients (88% female, 51% RYGB, age 41.2 [6.8] years) from 117 participants' retrospective cohort (1-2 years, >2 and <5 years, and >5 years). We still analyzed body composition and BMD by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and bone parameters.<br />Results: MVF prevalence was 17.5% (14/80), with no statistical difference between groups (p = 0.210). RYGB group had a higher prevalence of secondary hyperparathyroidism (SHPT) (PTH ≥ 65 pg/ml; 18.4% vs 7.8%, respectively, p = 0.04), PTH (61.3 vs 49.5 pg/ml, p = 0.001), CTX (0.766 [0.29] ng/ml vs 0.453 [0.30] ng/ml, p = 0.037), and AP (101.3 [62.4] U/L vs 123.9 [60.9] U/L, p = 0.027) than the SG group. Up to 5 years postoperatively, RYGB had a lower total (1.200 [0.087] vs 1.236 [0.100] g/cm <superscript>2</superscript> , p = 0.02), femoral neck (1.034 [0.110] vs 1.267 [0.105], p = 0.005), and total femur BMD (1.256 [0.155] vs 1.323 [0.167], p = 0.002) than SG group. We found no statistically significant difference between the MFV (+) and MVF (-) groups regarding age, sex, BMI, surgery time, BMD, or bone and metabolic parameters, including leptin.<br />Conclusion: We found a high prevalence of MVF after BS with no differences between RYGB and SG.<br /> (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1708-0428
Volume :
34
Issue :
3
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
Obesity surgery
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
38285298
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-023-07049-5