-
A total of 139,470 participants were included in this study, with 81,368 males (58.34%) and 58,102 females (41.66%). Participants’ mean age was 45.66 ± 10.72 years. Among them, 80,170 were included in the follow-up cohort, with 2,660 meeting the criteria for the self-matched analysis. The flowchart of participant selection is presented in Figure 1.
-
In total, 21,494 participants (15.41%) were included in the suspected osteoporosis group, with a mean BMD of 0.364 ± 0.071 g/cm2. The control group comprised 117,976 participants (84.59%) with a mean BMD of 0.499 ± 0.079 g/cm2. Table 1 compares health examination-related results between the two groups. Compared with the control group, the suspected osteoporosis group had a higher proportion of males (χ2 = 27.28, P < 0.001), older patients (t = 68.38, P < 0.001), and higher rates of smokers (χ2 = 215.36, P < 0.001) and heavy drinkers (χ2 = 215.36, P < 0.001). In addition, the suspected osteoporosis group exhibited significantly higher levels of metabolic-related indicators such as body mass index (BMI), waist circumference, FBG, HbA1c, blood pressure, LDL-C, and Hcy compared with the control group (P < 0.01). The inflammatory marker hs-CRP was also significantly elevated in the suspected osteoporosis group compared with the control group (P < 0.01), whereas no statistically significant difference was observed in body weight and HDL-C level between the two groups.
Control group (n = 117,976) Suspected osteoporosis (n = 21,494) Statistics BMD (g/cm2) 0.499 ± 0.079 0.364±0.071 t = 236.89, P < 0.001 Body mass (kg) 69.75 ± 13.32 69.72 ± 14.06 t = 0.38, P = 0.702 BMI (kg/m2) 24.59 ± 3.59 24.83 ± 3.79 t = 8.54, P < 0.001 Waist (cm) 85.54 ± 10.95 87.69 ± 11.18 t = 26.42, P < 0.001 FBG (mmol/L) 5.67 ± 1.29 5.89 ± 1.53 t = 23.34, P < 0.001 HbA1c (%) 5.79 ± 0.78 5.98 ± 0.92 t = 31.18, P < 0.001 Systolic blood pressure (mmHg) 119.97 ± 15.84 124.19 ± 16.97 t = 35.53, P < 0.001 Diastolic blood pressure (mmHg) 80.10 ± 11.74 81.95 ± 11.81 t = 21.27, P < 0.001 TC (mmol/L) 4.69 ± 0.89 4.83 ± 0.94 t = 20.69, P < 0.001 TG (mmol/L) 1.62 ± 1.31 1.71 ± 1.30 t = 9.56, P < 0.001 LDL-c (mmol/L) 2.98 ± 0.79 3.09 ± 0.83 t = 19.13, P < 0.001 Sex χ2 = 27.28, P < 0.001 Female 49495 (41.95) 8607 (40.04) Male 68481 (58.05) 12887 (59.96) Age(year) 44.48 ± 10.21 50.19 ± 12.26 t = 68.38, P < 0.001 Smoking status χ2 = 215.36, P < 0.001 No smoking 86,892 (73.65) 14,875 (69.21) Smoking 31084 (26.35) 6619 (30.79) Drinking status χ2 = 66.36, P < 0.001 Limited drinking 83,487 (70.77) 14,994 (69.76) Excessive drinking 34489 (29.23) 6500 (30.24) Hcy (μmol/L) 12.63 ± 7.13 13.32 ± 7.15 t = 12.82, P < 0.001 hs-CRP (mg/dl) 0.163 ± 0.479 0.203 ± 0.558 t = 10.63, P < 0.001 Scr (μmol/L) 69.66 ± 15.02 68.70 ± 16.08 t = 8.55, P < 0.001 BUN (mmol/L) 4.89 ± 1.23 5.02 ± 1.29 t = 14.84, P < 0.001 Ca2+ (mmol/L) 2.336 ± 0.085 2.342 ± 0.086 t = 8.66, P < 0.001 P (mmol/L) 1.167 ± 0.149 1.181 ± 0.151 t = 12.06, P < 0.001 iPTH (ng/L) 45.95 ± 16.35 48.13 ± 29.39 t = 4.55, P < 0.001 Ua (μmol/L) 329.85 ± 90.97 328.02 ± 87.96 t = 2.73, P = 0.006 VD3 (ng/ml) 17.27 ± 7.35 17.73 ± 7.57 t = 2.53, P = 0.012 HDL-C (mmol/L) 1.32 ± 0.34 1.32 ± 0.35 t = 1.36, P = 0.174 Note. MS: metabolic syndrome; BMI:body mass index; BMD: bone mineral density; TC: Total cholesterol; TG: Triglyceride; HDL-C: high density lipoprotein cholesterol; LDL-C: low density lipoprotein cholesterol; FBG: fasting blood glucose; UA: blood uric acid; HbA1c: hemoglobin A1c; hs-CRP: high sensitivity C-reactive protein; Scr: serum creatinine; BUN: urea nitrogen; Hcy: blood homocysteine; iPTH: intact Parathyroid Hormone Table 1. Comparison of data between groups according to bone mineral density screening results (n =139,470)
-
In total, 44,916 participants were included in the 0 MS criteria group, 31,147 in the 1 MS criterion group, 27,983 in the 2 MS criteria group, and 35,424 in the ≥ 3 MS criteria group. Table 2 presents a comparison of the baseline data for the four MS groups. All indicators, except for iPTH, exhibited statistically significant differences among the groups (P < 0.001). As the number of MS diagnostic criteria increased from the 0 MS criteria group to the MS group, there was a gradual increase in the proportion of males, smoking rate, heavy drinking rate, age, body weight, and BMD (P < 0.001). The inflammatory marker hs-CRP level showed a gradual increase, whereas the HDL-C level demonstrated a gradual decrease with increasing MS criteria (P < 0.001). Additionally, with an increase in the number of MS criteria, the proportion of suspected osteoporosis cases significantly increased (P < 0.001).
Met none diagnostic criterion of MS
(n = 44,916)Met one diagnostic criterion of MS (n = 31,147) Met two diagnostic criteria of MS
(n = 27,983)Met ≥3 diagnostic criteria of MS
(n = 35,424)Statistics Sex χ2 = 24000, P < 0.001 Female 30,746 (68.45) 13,426 (43.11) 7,947 (28.40) 5,983 (16.89) Male 14,170 (31.55) 17,721 (56.89) 20,036 (71.60) 29,441 (83.11) Smoking status χ2 = 11000, P < 0.001 No smoking 38,613 (85.97) 23,506 (75.47) 18,937 (67.67) 20,711 (58.47) Smoking 6,303 (14.03) 7,641 (24.53) 9,046 (32.33) 14,713 (41.53) Drinking status χ2 = 16000, P < 0.001 Limited drinking 39,522 (87.99) 23,082 (74.11) 17,482 (62.47) 18,395 (51.93) Excessive drinking 5,394 (12.01) 8,065 (25.89) 10,501 (37.53) 17,029 (48.07) BMD screening Relatively normal BMD 39,747 (88.49) 26,528 (85.17) 22,977 (82.11) 28,724 (81.09) χ2 = 998.15, P < 0.001 Suspected osteoporosis 5,169 (11.51) 4,619 (114.83) 5,006 (17.89) 6,700 (18.91) Age(year) 40.66 ± 10.57 46.79 ± 10.46* 48.61 ± 9.94*# 48.68 ± 9.35*# F = 5627.83, P < 0.001 BMI (kg/m2) 21.70 ± 2.44 24.22 ± 2.79 26.09 ± 2.94*# 27.56 ± 3.03*#@ F = 32582.08,
P < 0.001Body mass (kg) 59.37 ± 8.78 68.07 ± 10.79* 74.72 ± 11.38*# 80.46 ± 11.63*#@ F = 29015.81,
P < 0.001Waist (cm) 75.81 ± 7.03 84.70 ± 8.08* 90.91 ± 8.04*# 95.67 ± 7.82*#@ F = 49176.86,
P < 0.001Systolic blood pressure (mmHg) 108.06 ± 9.64 120.29 ± 13.61* 126.76 ± 14.73*# 132.01 ± 14.43*#@ F = 25315.30,
P < 0.001Diastolic blood pressure (mmHg) 70.99 ± 7.06 80.00 ± 9.86* 84.74 ± 10.52*# 89.21 ± 10.19*#@ F = 28008.72,
P < 0.001BMD (g/cm2) 0.462 ± 0.086 0.478 ± 0.095* 0.486 ± 0.095*# 0.495 ± 0.090*#@ F = 977.61, P < 0.001 TC (mmol/L) 4.48 ± 0.80 4.73 ± 0.88* 4.82 ± 0.92*# 4.89 ± 0.98*#@ F = 1672.26, P < 0.001 TG (mmol/L) 0.91 ± 0.32 1.29 ± 0.61* 1.73 ± 1.02*# 2.77 ± 1.83*#@ F = 20815.34,
P < 0.001LDL-c (mmol/L) 2.77 ± 0.73 3.08 ± 0.77* 3.08 ± 0.86*# 3.17 ± 0.80*#@ F = 1899.98, P < 0.001 HDL-C (mmol/L) 1.54 ± 0.32 1.37 ± 0.31* 1.24 ± 0.28*# 1.06 ± 0.25*#@ F = 18679.94,
P < 0.001FBG (mmol/L) 5.13 ± 0.36 5.44 ± 0.80* 5.76 ± 1.22*# 6.62 ± 1.95*#@ F = 10756.11,
P < 0.001HbA1c (%) 5.51 ± 0.31 5.69 ± 0.55* 5.86 ± 0.78*# 6.31 ± 1.14*#@ F = 8157.45, P < 0.001 Hcy (μmol/L) 11.17 ± 6.30 12.69 ± 7.09* 13.55 ± 7.44*# 13.9 ± 87.49*#@ F = 1162.34, P < 0.001 hs-CRP (mg/dl) 0.108 ± 0.348 0.164 ± 0.553* 0.193 ± 0.527*# 0.228 ± 0.545*#@ F = 399.77, P < 0.001 Cr (μmol/L) 64.53 ± 13.39 69.62 ± 15.33* 72.27 ± 14.95*# 73.57 ± 15.62*#@ F = 2937.67, P < 0.001 Bun (mmol/L) 4.57 ± 1.16 4.91 ± 1.24* 5.08 ± 1.22*# 5.19 ± 1.26*#@ F = 1973.15, P < 0.001 Ua (μmol/L) 281.25 ± 73.17 321.57 ± 81.81* 352.61 ± 84.60*# 379.68 ± 89.37*#@ F = 10508.23,
P < 0.001Ca2+ (mmol/L) 2.326 ± 0.084 2.336 ± 0.085* 2.342 ± 0.086*# 2.349 ± 0.085*#@ F = 561.73, P < 0.001 K+ (mmol/L) 4.227 ± 0.293 4.252 ± 0.302* 4.252 ± 0.304* 4.236 ± 0.306*#@ F = 60.39, P < 0.001 P (mmol/L) 1.186 ± 0.145 1.162 ± 0.149* 1.159 ± 0.151* 1.162 ± 0.152* F = 287.46, P < 0.001 iPTH(ng/L) 46.53 ± 25.06(n = 2,832) 45.96 ± 17.32
(n = 2,425)46.19 ± 16.70
(n = 2,533)46.56 ± 16.84
(n = 3,410)F = 0.60, P = 0.6133 VD3 (ng/ml) 16.61 ± 7.29(n = 2,832) 17.53 ± 7.85*
(n = 2,425)17.65 ± 7.35*
(n = 2,533)17.62 ± 7.11*
(n = 3,410)F = 13.02, P < 0.001 Note. MS: metabolic syndrome; BMI: body mass index; BMD: bone mineral density; TC: Total cholesterol; TG: Triglyceride; HDL-C: high density lipoprotein cholesterol; LDL-C: low density lipoprotein cholesterol; FBG: fasting blood glucose; UA: blood uric acid; HbA1c: hemoglobin A1c; hs-CRP: high sensitivity C-reactive protein; Cr: serum creatinine; Bun: urea nitrogen; Hcy: blood homocysteine; iPTH: intact Parathyroid Hormone
*: compared with met 0 diagnostic criteria of M, P<0.05;
#:compared with Met one diagnostic criteria of MS, P<0.05
@: compared with Met two diagnostic criteria of MS, P<0.05Table 2. Comparison of basic data among groups according to diagnostic criteria of MS (n=139,470)
In the follow-up cohort, there were 28,751 participants at baseline, 18,902 at 1-year follow-up, 12,844 at the 2-year follow-up, 8,820 at the 3-year follow-up, 6,158 at the 4-year follow-up, and 4,875 at the ≥ 5-year follow-up. The trend test revealed that the proportion of suspected osteoporosis cases increased gradually among the MS groups at baseline and each follow-up period (P < 0.05). Moreover, the MS group consistently exhibited the highest incidence of suspected osteoporosis. However, when considering the longitudinal aspect of the follow-up time, there was no significant increase in the proportion of suspected osteoporosis cases among the different MS groups (P > 0.05), as shown in Table 3.
Met none diagnostic
criterion of MSMet one diagnostic
criterion of MSMet two diagnostic criteria of MS Met ≥3 diagnostic criteria
of MS(MS group)Statistics Control group Suspected osteoporosis Control group Suspected osteoporosis Control group Suspected
osteoporosisControl
groupSuspected osteoporosis χ2 and
P valueBaseline
(n = 28,571)9,725 (88.76) 1,232 (11.24) 5,602 (86.00) 912 (14.00) 4,427
(84.26)827 (15.74) 4,858
(83.10)988 (16.90)* 123.76,
P < 0.0011-year
(n = 18,902)6,347 (89.34) 757 (10.66) 3,873 (86.07) 627 (13.93) 2,939
(84.65)533 (15.35) 3,210
(83.90)616 (16.10)* 82.63,
P < 0.0012-year
(n = 12,844)3,893 (89.17) 473 (10.83) 2,656 (86.04) 431 (13.96) 2,122
(84.74)382 (15.26) 2,405
(83.30)482 (16.70)* 57.27,
P < 0.0013-Year
(n = 8,820)2,695 (90.65) 278 (9.35) 1,845 (86.26) 294 (13.74) 1,433
(84.99)253 (15.01) 1,710
(84.57)312 (15.43)* 52.89,
P < 0.0014-Year
(n = 6,158)1,725 (88.87) 216 (11.13) 1,280 (86.49) 200 (13.51) 1,057
(85.04)186 (14.96) 1,244
(83.27)250 (16.73)* 23.91,
P < 0.001≥ 5-Year
(n = 4,875)1,281 (87.74) 179 (12.26) 1,046 (87.46) 150 (12.54) 914
(84.08)173 (15.92) 948
(83.75)184 (16.25)* 13.79,
P = 0.003χ2 = 0.24, P = 0.6263 χ2 = 1.35, P = 0.2454 χ2 = 0.21, P = 0.6487 χ2 = 0.57, P = 0.4519 List of Abbreviations: MS: metabolic syndrome;
*: the highest incidence among the four groups.Table 3. Comparison of follow-up data among groups according to diagnostic criteria of MS
-
Logistic regression analysis was performed with suspected osteoporosis as the dependent variable and the results of MS grouping as the independent variable. All odds ratios (ORs) for the 1, 2, and ≥ 3 MS criteria groups were > 1, indicating that for each additional MS diagnostic criterion, the likelihood of developing suspected osteoporosis increased by an average of 1.21 times (Z = 30.86, P < 0.001, 95% confidence interval: 1.200–1.230). After adjusting for age, sex, smoking, alcohol consumption, and other factors, the ORs for the 2 and ≥ 3 MS criteria groups remained > 1, indicating that MS grouping is an independent risk factor for the development of suspected osteoporosis (Table 4).
OR Z P 95% CI MS group (Unadjusted) Met none diagnostic criterion of MS 1.000 Met one diagnostic criterion of MS 1.338 13.42 0.000 1.283-1.397 Met two diagnostic criteria of MS 1.294 24.01 0.000 1.267-1.322 Met ≥3 diagnostic criteria of MS (MS group) 1.215 29.11 0.000 1.199-1.231 MS group (Adjusted) Met none diagnostic criterion of MS 1.000 Met one diagnostic criterion of MS 1.025 1.07 0.284 0.979-1.073 Met two diagnostic criteria of MS 1.099 7.65 0.000 1.073-1.127 Met ≥3 diagnostic criteria of MS (MS group) 1.090 10.39 0.000 1.073-1.108 Note. MS: metabolic syndrome;
Adjusted factors: Age (years), Sex (female=0, male=1), Smoking status (no smoking = 0, smoking = 1), Drinking status (limited drinking = 0, excessive drinking = 1)Table 4. Results of logistics regression analysis
-
In the follow-up cohort, we compared baseline and follow-up examination results of participants who completed health examinations at least 5 years later (median 1,925 days, minimum 1,825 days, maximum 3,195 days). Only individuals whose MS grouping remained unchanged during the 5-year follow-up were included in the self-matched analysis. A total of 2,660 participants were included, with 1,191 females (44.77%) and 1,469 males (55.23%). Table 5 presents relevant data and comparison results. After an average increase in age of 5.47 years, indicators related to MS, such as BMI, body weight, waist circumference, blood pressure, FBG and HbA1c, increased significantly compared to baseline (P < 0.01). Furthermore, Scr, BUN, and Ua also showed significant increases (P < 0.01), whereas BMD exhibited a significant decrease (P < 0.01). However, there were no significant changes in TC, TG, LDL-C, HDL-C, FBG, and hs-CRP levels.
Baseline (n = 2,660) ≥ 5 year follow-up (n = 2,660) Mean change Statistics BMD screening χ2 = 0.23, P = 0.634 Relatively normal BMD 2,297 (86.35) 2,285 (85.90) −12 Suspected osteoporosis 363 (13.65) 375 (14.10) + 12 Age (year) 42.63 ± 9.77 48.09 ± 9.86* + 5.47 t = 20.31, P < 0.001 BMI (kg/m2) 23.58 ± 3.68 24.18 ± 3.71 + 0.59 t = 5.89, P < 0.001 Body mass (kg) 67.23 ± 13.83 68.04 ± 13.78 + 0.804 t = 2.21, P = 0.034 Waist (cm) 82.78 ± 11.87 84.33 ± 11.48* + 1.55 t = 4.84, P < 0.001 BMD (g/cm2) 0.482 ± 0.087 0.473 ± 0.087 −0.008 t = 3.49, P < 0.001 Systolic blood pressure (mmHg) 115.12 ± 15.62 118.09 ± 15.43 + 2.97 t = 6.99, P < 0.001 Diastolic blood pressure (mmHg) 76.73 ± 11.92 79.28 ± 11.57 + 2.55 t = 7.91, P < 0.001 TC (mmol/L) 4.64 ± 0.87 4.61 ± 0.84 −0.03 t = 1.38, P =0.167 TG (mmol/L) 1.46 ± 1.19 1.48 ± 1.19 + 0.019 t = 0.58, P = 0.559 LDL-c (mmol/L) 2.90 ± 0.78 2.90 ± 0.77 −0.004 t = 0.21, P = 0.828 HDL-C (mmol/L) 1.39 ± 0.38 1.39 ± 0.39 + 0.002 t = 0.17, P = 0.869 FBG (mmol/L) 5.53 ± 1.18 5.63 ± 1.27 + 0.103 t = 3.06, P = 0.002 HbA1c (%) 5.70 ± 0.68 5.84 ± 0.75 + 0.14 t = 6.99, P < 0.001 Hcy (μmol/L) 12.14 ± 7.00 11.84 ± 5.90 −0.30 t = 1.59, P = 0.110 hs-CRP (mg/dl) 0.149 ± 0.478 0.135 ± 0.441 −0.013 t = 0.99, P = 0.319 Cr (μmol/L) 69.11 ± 14.32 70.46 ± 16.31 + 1.36 t = 3.22, P < 0.001 Bun (mmol/L) 4.59 ± 1.13 4.89 ± 1.24 + 0.30 t = 8.26, P < 0.001 Ua (μmol/L) 313.73 ± 88.12 322.52 ± 88.65 + 8.78 t = 3.62, P < 0.001 Ca2+ (mmol/L) 2.328 ± 0.083 2.330 ± 0.083 + 0.002 t = 0.84, P = 0.403 K+ (mmol/L) 4.204 ± 0.290 4.297 ± 0.300 + 0.092 t = 10.97, P < 0.001 P (mmol/L) 1.166 ± 0.139 1.160 ± 0.147 −0.005 t = 1.21, P = 0.225 iPTH (ng/L) 46.27 ± 15.73 45.09 ± 15.56 −1.19 t = 0.65, P = 0.515 VD3 (ng/ml) 15.46 ± 6.56 18.32 ± 8.06 + 2.86 t = 3.20, P = 0.002 Note. BMI: body mass index; BMD: bone mineral density; TC: total cholesterol; TG: Triglyceride; HDL-C: high density lipoprotein cholesterol; LDL-C: low density lipoprotein cholesterol; FBG: fasting blood glucose; UA: blood uric acid; HbA1c: hemoglobin A1c; hs-CRP: high sensitivity C-reactive protein; Cr: serum creatinine; Bun: urea nitrogen; Hcy: blood homocysteine; iPTH: intact parathyroid hormone Table 5. Comparison of clinical data before and after at least 5 years follow-up after (n = 2,660)
In the self-matched analysis, the proportion of suspected osteoporosis cases gradually increased with the number of MS diagnostic criteria at baseline and at least 5 years later (P < 0.05). In the 0 MS criteria group (n = 1,234), one case (0.08%) progressed to suspected osteoporosis. In the 1 MS criterion group (n = 481), one case (0.21%) progressed to suspected osteoporosis. In the 2 MS criteria group (n = 342), three cases (0.87%) progressed to suspected osteoporosis. In the MS group (n = 603), seven cases (1.15%) progressed to suspected osteoporosis. These findings indicate that the proportion of individuals developing suspected osteoporosis in the MS group was significantly higher than that in the 0 MS criteria group (1.15% versus 0.08%, χ2 = 10.76, P = 0.001).
The self-matched comparison of BMD values in the 0 MS criteria group showed no significant difference (t = 1.62, P = 0.106), suggesting that a 5-year increase in age in individuals without any MS criteria has little effect on BMD. Nevertheless, in the other three groups (1, 2, and ≥ 3 MS criteria), there was a significant decrease in BMD values (P < 0.05), indicating a more pronounced decrease in BMD in individuals with MS features as they age (Table 6).
Baseline (n = 2,660) ≥ 5 year follow-up (n = 2,660) Before and after comparison of BMD Relatively normal BMD Suspected osteoporosis Total BMD Relatively normal BMD Suspected osteoporosis Total BMD Met none diagnostic criterion of MS 1,088 (88.17) 146 (11.83) 1,234 0.459 ± 0.084 1,087 (88.09) 147 (11.91) 1,234 0.453 ± 0.083 t = 1.62, P = 0.106 Met one diagnostic criterion of MS 417 (86.69) 64 (13.31) 481 0.496 ± 0.092* 416 (86.49) 65 (13.51) 481 0.484 ± 0.095* t = 1.98, P = 0.048 Met two diagnostic criteria of MS 283 (82.75) 59 (17.25) 342 0.498 ± 0.080* 280 (81.87) 62 (18.13) 342 0.485 ± 0.086* t = 2.05, P = 0.041 Met ≥3 diagnostic criteria of MS (MS group) 509 (84.41) 94 (15.59) 603 0.509 ± 0.078*# 502 (83.25) 101 (16.75) 603 0.497 ± 0.083*# t = 2.48, P = 0.013 Statistics χ2 = 9.20, P = 0.027 F = 61.38,
P < 0.001χ2 = 13.09, P = 0.004 F = 45.45,
P < 0.001Note. MS: metabolic syndrome; BMD: bone mineral density
*: compared with met 0 diagnostic criterion of M, P < 0.05;
#:compared with Met one diagnostic criterion of MS, P < 0.05Table 6. The self-control study of BMD according to the standard of metabolic syndrome
An Investigation of the Association between Metabolic Syndrome and Osteoporosis Based on Chinese Health Examination Data
doi: 10.3967/bes2024.097
- Received Date: 2024-02-21
- Accepted Date: 2024-05-20
-
Key words:
- Health examination /
- Bone mineral density /
- Osteoporosis /
- Metabolic syndrome
Abstract:
Citation: | CHEN Hong Yu, ZHENG Ming Yang, CHENG Qing Li, ZHAO Jia Hui, ZHENG Yan Song. An Investigation of the Association between Metabolic Syndrome and Osteoporosis Based on Chinese Health Examination Data[J]. Biomedical and Environmental Sciences. doi: 10.3967/bes2024.097 |