Bone mineral loss during lactation and recovery after weaning
article
OA: closed
CC0
⤵ 1 in-corpus citation
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that bone mineral content (BMC) and density (BMD) are lost during lactation and regained within 6 months after weaning. METHODS: Two cohorts of women, defined by time postpartum, were enrolled into the study; each cohort was followed for 6 months. Women in the lactation cohort (65 lactating women and 48 nonlactating postpartum controls) were enrolled at 2 weeks postpartum. Women in the weaning cohort (40 lactating and 43 nonlactating postpartum controls) were enrolled at 4-6 months postpartum. Lactating women enrolled in the weaning cohort had been fully breast-feeding at enrollment and weaned within 2 months of enrollment. Bone mineral content of the total body and BMD of the lumbar spine and distal radius were measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. RESULTS: Lactating women lost significantly more bone in the total body (-2.8 versus -1.7%) and lumbar spine (-3.9 versus 1.5%) than did nonlactating women during the first 6 months postpartum. There was no effect of lactation on bone changes at the distal radius. After weaning, lactating women gained significantly more bone in the lumbar spine than did nonlactating women (5.5 versus 1.8%). Earlier resumption of menses was associated with a smaller loss of bone during lactation and a greater increase of bone after weaning. CONCLUSION: Women lose bone during lactation but gain bone after weaning. Thus, lactation may not result in net bone loss.
My notes (saved in your browser only)
Citation neighborhood (sparse)
Too few in-corpus citations on either side for a chart; here are the lists.
Cites (1)
Cited by (1)
References (25)
- REVERSIBLE TRABECULAR BONE DENSITY LOSS FOLLOWING INDUCED HYPO‐OESTROGENISM WITH THE GnRH ANALOGUE BUSERELIN IN PREMENOPAUSAL WOMEN via openalex
- doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(16)60782-3 via openalex
- doi:10.1111/j.1365-2265.1982.tb01597.x via openalex
- doi:10.1016/0002-9343(85)90468-1 via openalex
- doi:10.1111/j.1365-2265.1992.tb02350.x via openalex
- doi:10.1073/pnas.86.18.7183 via openalex
- doi:10.1093/ajcn/48.6.1479 via openalex
- doi:10.1002/9781118032923 via openalex
- W128531299 via openalex
- doi:10.1093/ije/22.4.684 via openalex
- doi:10.1210/jcem-70-1-83 via openalex
- doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a114716 via openalex
- doi:10.1093/ajcn/36.3.431 via openalex
- W2414729618 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/s0025-6196(12)62164-8 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/0306-9877(91)90276-5 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/0002-9343(91)80156-g via openalex
- doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a113987 via openalex
- doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a114384 via openalex
- doi:10.1001/jama.1993.03500240074029 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/s0002-9378(88)80075-9 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/0002-9378(81)90327-6 via openalex
- doi:10.1002/jbmr.5650050409 via openalex
- doi:10.1210/jcem-67-4-701 via openalex
- doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116570 via openalex
Cited by (1)
Source provenance
- openalex
- last seen: 2026-05-11T06:41:50.100108+00:00
License: CC0
· commercial use OK