Evidence Hub

Longitudinal study of the effect of calcium pidolate on bone mass in eugonadal women

Rico H, Revilla M, Villa LF, Alvarez de Buergo M, Arribas I

Calcified tissue international, 1994

36 participants

Abstract

Seventy-two eugonadal women, mean age 39 +/- 4 years, with a z score for total body bone mineral content (BMC) of less than -1.5 (mean -1.80 +/- 0.12) were selected from a previous screening study of normal values of total body and regional BMC in women using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. The women were distributed into two groups: 36 women undergoing treatment with 1 g/day of elemental calcium in the form of calcium pidolate and 36 women not treated. One year later, total body BMC, regional BMC in arms, legs and trunk, 24-hour urinary calcium excretion (Ca 24 hour), fasting urinary calcium/creatinine ratio, and serum tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase concentration were measured in both groups. There was a significant increase in total body and regional BMC (P < 0.001) in the group taking calcium pidolate. The increase was greater in arms and legs (2.5%) than in trunk (1.7%), being 2.6% for total body BMC. The z score increased from -1.81 +/- 0.13 to -1.52 +/- 0.12 (16%, P < 0.001). The corporal index did not change, and total body BMC corrected for fat-free body mass increased by 6.7% (P < 0.001). These changes were accompanied by an increase in 24-hour urinary calcium excretion and a decrease in urinary calcium/creatinine ratio and serum tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase concentration (P < 0.05 for all). There was a correlation between cumulative calcium dose at the end of treatment and gain in total body BMC (r2 = 0.925, P < 0.001). The untreated group showed no…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a clinical trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 36 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free