Aim: To identify disease-related risk factors for an altered bone mineral density (BMD) and geometry at young adulthood in patients with diabetes mellitus type 1 (DM1). Methods: Fifty-six DM1 patients (23 females, 33 males) with prepubertal onset of diabetes were studied after completion of skeletal growth. Bone parameters at the distal radius were investigated by peripheral quantitative computed tomography. Disease-related parameters, in particular average HbA1c during the 2 years around peak height velocity, were analyzed. Forty-seven healthy controls (32 females, 15 males) were studied. Results: Trabecular BMD was similar between DM1 patients and controls. The mean (±SD) cross-sectional bone area (CSA) was smaller in DM1 patients compared to controls (282.5 ± 45.4 vs. 326.7 ± 52.2 mm2, p = 0.002 and males 391.0 ± 61.3 vs. 423.4 ± 81.9 mm2, p = 0.1). In female DM1 patients, the CSA z-score correlated negatively with the body mass index z-score (r = -0.52, p = 0.01) and positively with the height z-score (r = 0.49, p = 0.02). Conclusions: DM1 patients are at risk for smaller bone sizes at the distal radius at the end of pubertal growth, especially females with increased adiposity. Diabetes-specific parameters seem to have a low impact on forearm volumetric apparent mineral density.

Keywords:
Type 1 diabetes mellitus, Bone mineral density, Adolescence, Glycemic control, Peripheral quantitative computed tomography
1.
Theintz G, et al: Longitudinal monitoring of bone mass accumulation in healthy adolescents: evidence for a marked reduction after 16 years of age at the levels of lumbar spine and femoral neck in female subjects. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1992;75:1060-1065.
2.
Neu CM, et al: Bone densities and bone size at the distal radius in healthy children and adolescents: a study using peripheral quantitative computed tomography. Bone 2001;28:227-232.
3.
Tylleskär T, Tuvemo K, Gustafsson J: Diabetes control deteriorates in girls at cessation of growth: relationship with body mass index. Diabet Med 2001;18:811-815.
4.
Vestergaard P: Discrepancies in bone mineral density and fracture risk in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes: a metaanalysis. Osteoporos Int 2007;18:427-444.
5.
Bechtold S, et al: Early manifestation of type 1 diabetes in children is a risk factor for changed bone geometry: data using peripheral quantitative computed tomography. Pediatrics 2006;118:627-634.
6.
Khazai NB, Beck GR Jr, Umpierrez GE: Diabetes and fractures: an overshadowed association. Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes 2009;16:435-445.
7.
Holmberg AH, et al: The association between hyperglycemia and fracture risk in middle age. A prospective, population-based study of 22,444 men and 10,902 women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2008;93:815-822.
8.
Saha MT, et al: Bone mass and structure in adolescents with type 1 diabetes compared to healthy peers. Osteoporos Int 2009;20:1401-1406.
9.
Sievänen H, et al: Peripheral quantitative computed tomography in human long bones: evaluation of in vitro and in vivo precision. J Bone Miner Res 1998;13:871-882.
10.
Butz S, et al: Forearm BMD as measured by peripheral quantitative computed tomography (pQCT) in a German reference population. Osteoporos Int 1994;4:179-184.
11.
Takada M, et al: Accuracy and precision study in vitro for peripheral quantitative computed tomography. Osteoporos Int 1996;6:207-212.
12.
Louis O, et al: Cortical and total bone mineral content of the radius: accuracy of peripheral quantitative computed tomography. Bone 1996;18:467-472.
13.
Lettgen B, et al: Bone mineral density in children and adolescents with juvenile diabetes: selective measurement of bone mineral density of trabecular and cortical bone using peripheral quantitative computed tomography. Horm Res 1996;43:173-175.
14.
Moyer-Mileur LJ, et al: Bone mineral acquisition in adolescents with type 1 diabetes. J Pediatr 2004;145:662-669.
15.
Bechtold S, et al: Bone size normalizes with age in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2007;30:2046-2050.
16.
Valerio G, et al: The lumbar bone mineral density is affected by long-term poor metabolic control in adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Horm Res 2002;58:266-272.
17.
Harangi F, Soltész G, Méhes K: Hypercalciuria in children with diabetes mellitus. Helv Paediatr Acta 1989;43:267-271.
18.
Shore RM, et al: Osteopenia in juvenile diabetes. Calfic Tissue Int 1981;33:455-457.
19.
Heilman K, et al: Lower bone mineral density in children with type 1 diabetes is associated with poor glycemic control and higher serum ICAM-1 and urinary isoprostane levels. J Bone Miner Metab 2009;27: 598-604.
20.
Amiel SA, et al: Impaired insulin action in puberty. A contributing factor to poor glycemic control in adolescents with diabetes. N Engl J Med 1986;315:215-219.
21.
Roelants M, Hauspie R, Hoppenbrouwers K: References for growth and pubertal development from birth to 21 years in Flanders, Belgium. Ann Hum Biol 2009;36:680-694.
22.
Moens G, et al: Body mass index and health among the working population: epidemiologic data from Belgium. Eur J Public Health 1999;9:119-123.
23.
Neu CM, et al: Modeling of cross-sectional bone size, mass and geometry at the proximal radius: a study of normal bone development using peripheral quantitative computed tomography. Osteoporos Int 2001;12:538-547.
24.
Rauch F, Schönau E: Peripheral quantitative computed tomography of the distal radius in young subjects - new reference data and interpretation of results. J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact 2005;5:119-126.
25.
Heap J, et al: Alterations in bone characteristics associated with glycemic control in adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus. J Pediatr 2004;144:56-62.
26.
Pollock NK, et al: Is adiposity advantageous for bone strength? A peripheral quantitative computed tomography study in late adolescent females. Am J Clin Nutr 2007;86:1530-1538.
27.
Parhami F, et al: Lipid oxidation products have opposite effects on calcifying vascular cell and bone cell differentiation. A possible explanation for the paradox of arterial calcification in osteoporotic patients. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 1997;17:680-687.
© 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel
2013
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.