Fracture risk in women with osteoporosis initiated on gastro-resistant risedronate versus immediate release risedronate or alendronate: a claims data analysis in the USA.

The study results indicate that women with osteoporosis initiated on gastro-resistant risedronate have a lower risk of fracture than those initiated on immediate release risedronate or alendronate. A large proportion of women discontinued all oral bisphosphonate therapies within 1 year of treatment start. PURPOSE: Using a US claims database (2009-2019), we compared risk of fractures between women with osteoporosis initiated on gastro-resistant (GR) risedronate and those initiated on (a) immediate release (IR) risedronate or (b) immediate release alendronate. METHODS: Women aged ≥ 60 years with osteoporosis who had ≥ 2 oral bisphosphonate prescription fills were followed for ≥ 1 year after the first observed bisphosphonates dispensing (index date). Fracture risk was compared between the GR risedronate and IR risedronate/alendronate cohorts using adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRRs), both overall and in subgroups with high fracture risk due to older age or comorbidity/medications. Site-specific fractures were identified based on diagnosis codes recorded on medical claims using a claims-based algorithm. Persistence on bisphosphonate therapy was evaluated for all groups. RESULTS: aIRRs generally indicated lower fracture risk for GR risedronate than IR risedronate and alendronate. When comparing GR risedronate to IR risedronate, statistically significant aIRRs (p < 0.05) were observed for pelvic fractures in the full cohorts (aIRRs = 0.37), for any fracture and pelvic fractures among women aged ≥ 65 years (aIRRs = 0.63 and 0.41), for any fracture and pelvic fractures among women aged ≥ 70 years (aIRRs = 0.69 and 0.24), and for pelvic fracture among high-risk women due to comorbidity/medications (aIRR = 0.34). When comparing GR risedronate to alendronate, statistically significant aIRRs were observed for pelvic fractures in the full cohorts (aIRR = 0.54), for any fracture and wrist/arm fractures among women aged ≥ 65 years (aIRRs = 0.73 and 0.63), and for any fracture, pelvic, and wrist/arm fractures among women aged ≥ 70 years (aIRRs = 0.72, 0.36, and 0.58). In all cohorts, ~ 40% completely discontinued oral bisphosphonates within 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: Discontinuation rates of oral bisphosphonate therapy were high. However, women initiated on GR risedronate had a significantly lower risk of fracture for several skeletal sites than women initiated on IR risedronate/alendronate, particularly those aged ≥ 70 years.

Exercise training and bone mineral density in postmenopausal women: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of intervention studies with emphasis on potential moderators.

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was (1) to determine exercise effects on bone mineral density (BMD) in postmenopausal women and (2) to address the corresponding implication of bone and menopausal status or supervision in postmenopausal women. A comprehensive search of eight electronic databases according to the PRISMA statement up to August 9, 2022, included controlled exercise trials ≥ 6 months. BMD changes (standardized mean differences: SMD) at the lumbar spine (LS), femoral neck (FN), and total hip (TH) were considered as outcomes. Study group comparisons were conducted for osteopenia/osteoporosis versus normal BMD, early versus late postmenopausal women, and predominantly supervised versus predominantly non-supervised study arms. We applied an inverse heterogeneity (IVhet) model. In summary, 80 studies involving 94 training and 80 control groups with a pooled number of 5581 participants were eligible. The IVhet model determined SMDs of 0.29 (95% CI: 0.16-0.42), 0.27 (95% CI: 0.16-0.39), and 0.41 (95% CI: 0.30-0.52) for LS, FN, and THBMD, respectively. Heterogeneity between the trial results varied from low (I2 = 20%, TH BMD) to substantial (I2 = 68%, LS-BMD). Evidence for publication bias/small study effects was negligibly low (FN-, TH-BMD) to high (LSBMD). We observed no significant differences (p > .09) for exercise effects on LS-, FN-, or TH-BMD-LS between studies/study arms with or without osteopenia/osteoporosis, early versus late postmenopausal women, or predominantly supervised versus non-supervised exercise programs. Using robust statistical methods, the present work provides further evidence for a positive effect of exercise on BMD in postmenopausal women. Differences in bone status (osteopenia/osteoporosis versus normal bone), menopausal status (early versus late postmenopausal), and supervision (yes versus no) did not significantly affect the exercise effects on BMD at LS or proximal femur.

Exercise and the prevention of major osteoporotic fractures in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis with special emphasis on intensity progression and study duration.

The role of exercise in preventing osteoporotic fractures is vague, and further recommendations for optimized exercise protocols are very rare. In the present work, we provided positive evidence for exercise effects on the number of osteoporotic fractures in adults, albeit without observing any significant relevance of intensity progression or study duration. INTRODUCTION: Osteoporotic fractures are a major challenge confronting our aging society. Exercise might be an efficient agent for reducing osteoporotic fractures in older adults, but the most promising exercise protocol for that purpose has yet to be identified. The present meta-analysis thus aimed to identify important predictors of the exercise effect on osteoporotic fractures in adults. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of six literature databases according to the PRISMA guideline that included controlled exercise studies and reported the number of low-trauma major osteoporotic fractures separately for exercise (EG) and control (CG) groups. Primary study outcome was incidence ratio (IR) for major osteoporotic fractures. Sub-analyses were conducted for progression of intensity (yes vs. no) during the trial and the study duration (≤ 12 months vs. > 12 months). RESULTS: In summary, 11 studies with a pooled number of 9715 participant-years in the EG and 9592 in the CG were included. The mixed-effects conditional Poisson regression revealed positive exercise effects on major osteoporotic fractures (RR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.54-0.94, p = .006). Although studies with intensity progression were more favorable, our subgroup analysis did not determine significant differences for diverging intensity progression (p = .133) or study duration (p = .883). Heterogeneity among the trials of the subgroups (I2 ≤ 0-7.1%) was negligible. CONCLUSION: The present systematic review and meta-analysis provided significant evidence for the favorable effect of exercise on major osteoporotic fractures. However, diverging study and exercise characteristics along with the close interaction of exercise parameters prevented the derivation of reliable recommendations for exercise protocols for fracture reductions. PROSPERO ID: CRD42021250467.

Real-world evidence: new opportunities for osteoporosis research. Recommendations from a Working Group from the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO).

This narrative review summarises the recommendations of a Working Group of the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) for the conduct and reporting of real-world evidence studies with a focus on osteoporosis research. PURPOSE: Vast amounts of data are routinely generated at every healthcare contact and activity, and there is increasing recognition that these real-world data can be analysed to generate scientific evidence. Real-world evidence (RWE) is increasingly used to delineate the natural history of disease, assess real-life drug effectiveness, understand adverse events and in health economic analysis. The aim of this work was to understand the benefits and limitations of this type of data and outline approaches to ensure that transparent and high-quality evidence is generated. METHODS: A ESCEO Working Group was convened in December 2022 to discuss the applicability of RWE to osteoporosis research and approaches to best practice. RESULTS: This narrative review summarises the agreed recommendations for the conduct and reporting of RWE studies with a focus on osteoporosis research. CONCLUSIONS: It is imperative that research using real-world data is conducted to the highest standards with close attention to limitations and biases of these data, and with transparency at all stages of study design, data acquisition and curation, analysis and reporting to increase the trustworthiness of RWE study findings.

Adjuvant pharmacological strategies for the musculoskeletal system during long-term space missions.

Despite 2 h of daily exercise training, muscle wasting and bone loss are still present after 6-month missions to the international space station. Some crew members lose bone much faster than others. In preparation for missions to the Moon and Mars, space agencies are therefore reviewing their countermeasure portfolios. Here, we discuss the potential of current pharmacological strategies. Bone loss in space is fuelled by bone resorption. Alendronate, an oral bisphosphonate, reduced bone losses in experimental bed rest and space. However, gastrointestinal side effects precluded its further utilization in space. Zoledronate (a potent bisphosphonate), denosumab (RANKL antagonist) and romosozumab (sclerostin antagonist) are all administered via injection. They effectively suppress bone resorption and are routinely prescribed against osteoporosis. Their serious adverse effects, namely, osteonecrosis of the jaw and atypical femur fractures occur very rarely when the usage is limited to 1 or 2 years. Hence, utilization of one of these compounds may outweigh the bone risks of space travelling, in particular in those with high bone resorption rates. Muscle wasting in space is likely due to hampered muscle protein synthesis. Even though this might theoretically be countered by the synthesis-boosting effects of anabolic steroids, the practical grounds for such recommendation are currently weak. Moreover, they reveal their full potential only when combined with an anabolic exercise stimulus, for example, via strength training. It therefore seems that a combination of exercise and pharmacological countermeasures should be considered for musculoskeletal health on the way to the Moon and Mars and back.

[Update of the S3-guideline on diagnostics, prophylaxis and treatment of osteoporosis]. / Update der S3-Leitlinie Diagnostik, Prophylaxe und Therapie der Osteoporose.

With the aid of a new fracture risk model, the great treatment gap for osteoporosis should be closed. All patients older than 70 years should undergo a diagnostic procedure for osteoporosis. An additional risk threshold (≥ 10% per 3 years for femoral and vertebral fractures) should enable patients with a high risk of fracture to be treated with osteoanabolic agents. The use of osteoanabolic agents makes it necessary to administer antiresorptive drugs afterwards. Due to the low event rate of osteonecrosis of the jaw, the initiation of a specific osteoporosis treatment should not be delayed by prophylactic dental treatment. The adherence to the drug treatment should be improved by an individualized approach on the basis of a cooperation between patients, caregivers, and physicians. A regular assessment of falls, including the timed up and go test should be carried out in patients older than 70 years.

Fracture rates and economic outcomes in patients with osteoporosis prescribed risedronate gastro-resistant versus other oral bisphosphonates: a claims data analysis.

Patients with osteoporosis prescribed risedronate gastro-resistant had a lower incidence of fractures versus those prescribed other oral bisphosphonates. Administration of risedronate gastric-resistant does not require fasting, and this more convenient dosing administration may explain its improved efficacy. PURPOSE: Up to half of patients do not follow complex dosing instructions of immediate-release bisphosphonates used for the prevention of osteoporotic fractures, which can result in suboptimal effectiveness. Risedronate gastro-resistant (GR) offers a more convenient dosing option by eliminating the need for fasting. This study compares fracture rates and outcomes between osteoporosis women treated with risedronate GR (GR cohort) versus other oral bisphosphonates (other cohort). METHODS: Claims from women with osteoporosis in the USA were analyzed. Patients were classified into the two cohorts based on the first oral bisphosphonate observed (index date) and matched 1:1 based on patient characteristics. Patients were observed for ≥ 2 years following the index date. Fracture rates, health care resource utilization and costs, and treatment persistence were compared. RESULTS: In total, 2,726 patients were selected in each cohort (median age: 60.0 years). The incidence of fractures was lower in the GR versus the other cohort for any fracture sites (incidence rate ratio, 95% CI: 0.83, 0.70-0.97) and spine fractures (0.71, 0.54-0.95), although the respective rate of medication discontinuation at 2 years was 80.5% and 74.4%. Time to first fracture was delayed for the GR cohort, reaching statistical significance after 36 months. The GR cohort incurred fewer hospitalizations (incidence rate per 1,000 patient-years: GR = 106.74; other = 124.20, p < 0.05) translating into lower hospitalization costs per patient per year (GR = $3,611; other = $4,603, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Patients prescribed risedronate GR versus other bisphosphonates had a lower incidence of fractures, which may be explained by the fact that the GR formulation is absorbed even when taken with food.

Management of patients at very high risk of osteoporotic fractures through sequential treatments.

Osteoporosis care has evolved markedly over the last 50 years, such that there are now an established clinical definition, validated methods of fracture risk assessment and a range of effective pharmacological agents. Currently, bone-forming (anabolic) agents, in many countries, are used in those patients who have continued to lose bone mineral density (BMD), patients with multiple subsequent fractures or those who have fractured despite treatment with antiresorptive agents. However, head-to-head data suggest that anabolic agents have greater rapidity and efficacy for fracture risk reduction than do antiresorptive therapies. The European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) convened an expert working group to discuss the tools available to identify patients at high risk of fracture, review the evidence for the use of anabolic agents as the initial intervention in patients at highest risk of fracture and consider the sequence of therapy following their use. This position paper sets out the findings of the group and the consequent recommendations. The key conclusion is that the current evidence base supports an "anabolic first" approach in patients found to be at very high risk of fracture, followed by maintenance therapy using an antiresorptive agent, and with the subsequent need for antiosteoporosis therapy addressed over a lifetime horizon.

Novel formulations of oral bisphosphonates in the treatment of osteoporosis.

Oral bisphosphonates are a key intervention in the treatment of osteoporosis and in reducing the risk of fragility fractures. Their use is supported by over 3 decades of evidence; however, patient adherence to oral bisphosphonates remains poor in part due to complex dosing instructions and adverse events, including upper gastrointestinal symptoms. This problem has led to the development of novel oral bisphosphonate formulations. Buffered, effervescent alendronate is dissolved in water and so seeks to reduce upper gastro-intestinal adverse events, and gastro-resistant risedronate aims to reduce the complexity of dosing procedure (e.g. fasting prior to consumption) whilst still maintaining the efficacy of fracture risk reduction. Clinical trials and real-world data have been employed to demonstrate some benefits in terms of reduced upper gastro-intestinal adverse events, adherence, persistence and health economic outcomes. This report describes the result of an ESCEO (European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis) expert working group, which explores where oral bisphosphonates sit in current clinical practice guidelines, review their risk-benefit profile and the consequences of poor adherence before exploring novel oral bisphosphonate formulations and their potential clinical and health economic impact. Further research is required but there are signs that these novel, oral bisphosphonate formulations may lead to improved tolerance of oral bisphosphonates and thus, improved adherence and fracture outcomes.

[Risk assessment in osteoporosis : Time-tested and new approaches]. / Risikoassessment bei Osteoporose : Bewährtes und Neues.

Fracture risk cannot be determined by bone density alone. It is important to identify and consider risk factors that individually increase the risk of fractures when they occur. Risk calculators have been developed worldwide to determine fracture risk. The risk factors currently listed in the Dachverbands Osteologie (DVO) S3 Guidelines for the "Diagnosis and Therapy of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis and Male Osteoporosis" are diverse and should be prioritized, since not every fracture risk factor present increases the risk of a vertebral or femoral neck fracture to the same extent. Due to the unknown interaction between risk factors, no more than two risk factors in addition to age, gender, and bone density measurement should be considered per patient. For risk assessment, it is important that the two thresholds defined by the German guideline are reached, above which diagnostic workup or specific therapy for fracture risk reduction should be recommended. These thresholds are currently defined as 20% for diagnostics and 30% for therapy, based on the absolute 10-year risk for vertebral and femoral neck fractures. The threshold for diagnostics is reached with the presence of a risk factor mentioned in the guideline. To reach the threshold for therapy, the bone density measurement result is required to reach the age-specific T­score. However, typical fragile fractures of the vertebral bodies or femur increase the fracture risk so substantially that therapy can be recommended even without a bone density result.

[Update on fracture prevention after menopause]. / Update zur Frakturprävention nach der Menopause.

Update on fracture prevention after menopause Abstract. Osteoporosis is a common disease. It is multifactorial and polygenetic in pathogenesis as well as clinically underdiagnosed and undertreated. There are several medical specialties involved in the care of female osteoporosis patients. "Gate keepers" of all female osteoporosis patients are the gynecologists, because they see the patient at the onset of menopausal symptoms, which may be indicative of accelerated bone loss. It is important to plan therapy with different sequences, one of which may be gynecologically recommended hormone therapy. Since osteoporosis is a chronic disease in the vast majority of cases, long-term therapy and patient retention is essential.

[Influence of hormone or hormone replacement therapy on bone healing]. / Einfluss einer Hormon- oder Hormonersatztherapie auf die Knochenheilung.

Since the observations of Fuller Albright in 1940, it is well documented that estrogen deficiency is one of the major causes of osteoporosis. Osteoporosis increases not only the risk of fracture and consecutively the number of fractures but can also induce a disorder of fracture healing. This raises the question whether estrogen deficiency negatively influences bone healing in addition to fragility. The currently available literature on this topic provides indications that estrogen deficiency negatively influences fracture healing in the various stages of healing. Furthermore, there is evidence that the administration of estrogen antagonizes these negative effects. Future clinical investigations are needed to find out whether the experimental data can be transferred to the patients.

[Osteoporosis - implications of the new guidelines in practice]. / Osteoporose ­ Implikation der neuen Leitlinie in die Praxis.

In September 2023, the guideline on the prophylaxis, diagnosis, and treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women and men was published as a completely revised guideline. The implications for practice include a change in the justifying indication for performing a bone density measurement, the time interval over which the fracture risk is determined, the level and number of therapy thresholds, and the recommendations for the therapeutic approach that are adapted to the individual fracture risk present. Risk assessment for the prediction of spine and hip fractures is essential in the context of osteoporosis diagnostics. In addition to age and gender, there are a total of 33 risk factors to determine the individual risk of fracture. Much more attention is paid to the assessment of the risk of falls and, depending on the result, combined with recommendations for muscle training and protein intake from the age of 65. Risk indicators must also be taken into account when determining the indication for osteoporosis diagnosis, as well as the risk factors of the imminent risk of fracture. The indication for baseline diagnostics has changed from the >20% 10-year fracture risk to diagnostics in postmenopausal women and in men aged 50 years and older, depending on the fracture risk factor profile. This eliminates a specific fracture risk threshold for basic diagnostics. Thus, in the young patient group (50-60 years), the risk factors considered medically relevant for the indication for osteoporosis diagnosis must be taken into account. New thresholds as an indication for initiating therapy is the determination of fracture risk using a risk calculator over 3 years instead of 10 years. The indication for drug therapy should be based on the threshold values of the DVO risk model. The data clearly suggests a significantly faster and more effective fracture risk-reducing effect of anabolic therapy. This is recommended in the first sequence in cases of a very high risk of fracture from 10%/3 years with osteoanabolic active substances (teriparatide or romosozumab). Such a therapy sequence should be initiated directly and not delayed due to upcoming dental procedures. Follow-up therapy to consolidate the reduction of fracture risk should be chosen individually.

[Update of the S3-guideline on diagnostics, prophylaxis and treatment of osteoporosis]. / Update der S3-Leitlinie Diagnostik, Prophylaxe und Therapie der Osteoporose.

With the aid of a new fracture risk model, the great treatment gap for osteoporosis should be closed. All patients older than 70 years should undergo a diagnostic procedure for osteoporosis. An additional risk threshold (≥ 10% per 3 years for femoral and vertebral fractures) should enable patients with a high risk of fracture to be treated with osteoanabolic agents. The use of osteoanabolic agents makes it necessary to administer antiresorptive drugs afterwards. Due to the low event rate of osteonecrosis of the jaw, the initiation of a specific osteoporosis treatment should not be delayed by prophylactic dental treatment. The adherence to the drug treatment should be improved by an individualized approach on the basis of a cooperation between patients, caregivers, and physicians. A regular assessment of falls, including the timed up and go test should be carried out in patients older than 70 years.

[Development of the new guidelines on osteoporosis : Methodological and content development]. / Entwicklung der neuen Leitlinien Osteoporose : Methodische und inhaltliche Entwicklung.

Since 2018, the present S3 guideline Prophylaxis, Diagnosis and Therapy of Osteoporosis (AWMF 183-001) has been updated following a previous update of the underlying PICO questions (Population-Intervention-Comparison-Outcome questions) for a systematic literature search. The focus of the guideline update, in addition to updating the evidence supporting literature along with recommendations, was the development of a risk calculator for vertebral fractures and femoral neck fractures. This is essential for managing risk assessment because of the multitude of risk factors that contribute to fracture risk. This article considers the development of the guideline update methodologically and substantively, the latter by reflecting on the core themes of the guideline update.

Exercise effects on glucocorticoid-induced bone loss in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objectives: Due to their pronounced anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive effects, glucocorticoids (GCs) are widely used in inflammatory conditions and organ transplants. Unfortunately, GC-induced osteoporosis is one of the most common causes of secondary osteoporosis. The aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the effect of exercise added to GC therapy on BMD at the lumbar spine or femoral neck in people on GC therapy. Methods: A systematic literature search of five electronic databases included controlled trials with a duration of >6 months and at least two study arms [glucocorticoids (GCs) and GCs and exercise (GC + EX)] were conducted up to 20 September 2022. Studies involving other pharmaceutical therapies with relevant effects on bone metabolism were excluded. We applied the inverse heterogeneity model. Outcome measures were standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% CIs for BMD changes at the lumbar spine (LS) and femoral neck (FN). Results: We identified three eligible trials with a total of 62 participants. In summary, the GC + EX intervention indicated statistically significantly higher SMDs for LS-BMD [SMD 1.50 (95% CI 0.23, 2.77)] but not for FN-BMD [0.64 (95% CI -0.89, 2.17)] compared with GC treatment alone. We observed substantial heterogeneity (LS-BMD I 2 = 71%, FN-BMD I 2 = 78%) between the study results. Conclusion: Although more well-designed exercise studies are needed to address the issue of exercise effects on GC-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) in more detail, upcoming guidelines should pay more attention to the aspect of exercise for bone strengthening in GIOP. Registration number: PROSPERO: CRD42022308155.

Additive Effects of Exercise and Vitamin D Supplementation (with and without Calcium) on Bone Mineral Density in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Exercise is a recognized component in the prevention and therapy of osteoporosis. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the effect of Vitamin D (Vit-D) added to exercise versus exercise alone on bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine (LS) or hip in older adults. A systematic review based on six literature databases according to PRISMA included (a) exercise trials, with an exercise (EX) and a combined exercise + Vit-D group (EX + Vit-D), (b) intervention ≥ 6 months, and (c) BMD assessments at LS or hip. Effects sizes (MD) and 95%-confidence intervals (95%-CI) were calculated using a random-effect model that includes the inverse heterogeneity model (IVhet). Five studies with 281 participants in the EX and 279 participants in the EX + Vit-D were included. No significant differences between EX versus EX + Vit-D were observed for BMD-LS (MD: 0.002, 95%-CI: -0.033 to 0.036) or BMD-hip (MD: 0.003, 95%-CI: -0.035 to 0.042). Heterogeneity between the trial results was moderate-substantial for LS (I2 = 0%) and moderate for hip-BMD (I2 = 35%). The funnel plot analysis suggests evidence for a publication/small study bias for BMD-LS and hip results. In summary, this present systematic review and meta-analysis were unable to determine significant positive interaction of exercise and Vit-D on LS- or hip-BMD. We predominately attribute this finding to (1) the less bone-specific exercise protocols of at least two of the five studies and (2) the inclusion criteria of the studies that did not consequently focus on Vit-D deficiency. This issue should be addressed in more detail by adequately powered exercise trials with promising exercise protocols and participants with Vit-D deficiency. This trial is registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) ID: CRD42022309813.

The effect of aquatic exercise on bone mineral density in older adults. A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Introduction: Aquatic or water-based exercise is a very popular type of exercise in particular for people with physical limitations, joint problems and fear of falling. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to provide evidence for the effect of aquatic exercise on Bone Mineral Density (BMD) in adults. Methods: A systematic literature search of five electronic databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science and CINAHL) according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) was conducted until 2022/01/30, with an update to 2022/10/07. We included controlled trials with a duration of more than 6 months and at least two study groups, aquatic exercise (EG) versus non-training controls (CG) with no language restrictions. Outcome measures were standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95%-confidence intervals (95%-CI) for BMD changes at the lumbar spine (LS) and femoral neck (FN). We applied a random-effects meta-analysis and used the inverse heterogeneity (IVhet) model to analyze the data. Results: Excluding an outlier study with an exceptionally high effect size for LS-BMD, we observed a statistically significant (p = .002) effect (EG vs. CG) of aquatic exercise for the LS-BMD (n = 10; SMD: 0.30; 95%-CI: 0.11-0.49). In parallel, the effect of aquatic exercise on FN-BMD was statistically significant (p = .034) compared to the CG (n = 10; SMD: 0.76, 95%-CI: 0.06-1.46). Of importance, heterogeneity between the trial results was negligible for LS (I2: 7%) but substantial for FN-BMD (I2: 87%). Evidence for risks of small study/publication bias was low for LS-BMD and considerable for FN-BMD. Discussion: In summary, the present systematic review and meta-analysis provides further evidence for the favorable effect of exercise on bone health in adults. Due to its safety and attractiveness, we particularly recommend water-based exercise for people unable, afraid or unmotivated to conduct intense land-based exercise programs.

Effects of Hormone Therapy and Exercise on Bone Mineral Density in Healthy Women-A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: There is some evidence that an adequate "anabolic hormonal milieu" is essential for the mechanosensitivity/transduction/response of bone tissue. OBJECTIVE: This work aimed to determine whether enhancing hormone therapy (HT) with exercise increases the isolated effect of HT on bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine (LS) and femoral neck (FN). METHODS: A comprehensive search of 6 electronic databases according to the PRISMA statement up to April 28, 2021, included controlled trials longer than 6 months with 3 study arms: (a) HT, (b) exercise, and (c) HT plus exercise (HT + E). Apart from HT, no pharmaceutic therapy or diseases with relevant osteoanabolic or osteocatabolic effect on bone metabolism were included. The present analysis was conducted as a random-effects meta-analysis. Outcome measures were standardized mean differences (SMD) for BMD changes at the LS and FN. RESULTS: Our search identified 6 eligible studies (n = 585). Although the effect of HT + E was more pronounced in the LS (SMD: 0.19; 95% C,: -0.15 to 0.53) and FN-BMD (0.18; -0.09 to 0.44) compared to the HT group, we did not observe significant differences between the 2 groups. We observed a low (I2: 29%) or moderate (I2: 49%) level of heterogeneity between the trials for FN or LS. CONCLUSION: We do not observe a significant effect of HT + E vs HT alone. We largely attribute this result to varying HT supplementation and hormonal status. Bearing in mind that synergistic/additive effects between HT and mechanical stimulation can only be expected in situations of hormonal insufficiency, further clinical studies should consider baseline endogenous estrogen production but also HT dosing more carefully.