| Title |
The Relationship Among Hypertension, Antihypertensive Medications, and Osteoporosis: A Narrative Review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Calcified Tissue International, November 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00223-012-9671-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Katarina Ilić, Nevena Obradović, Nada Vujasinović-Stupar |
| Abstract |
Osteoporosis and hypertension are two frequent diseases among the aging population that share a similar etiopathology and often coexist. Moreover, treatment of hypertension affects bone mineral density and, therefore, can worsen osteoporosis. This narrative review considers the influence of the main etiologic factors that contribute to the development of hypertension and osteoporosis and examines the effect of the most often used antihypertensives on bones. A computerized literature search of relevant English publications regarding the etiology of hypertension and osteoporosis as well as the impact of antihypertensives on osteoporosis from 1996 to 2011 was completed in October 2011. The latest update in the search was performed from May to June 2012. The most relevant nongenetic factors in the etiology of osteoporosis and hypertension are low calcium intake, vitamin D and vitamin K deficiency, high consumption of sodium salt, and the effects of different forms of nitric oxide. Thiazide diuretics are the only antihypertensives that have a positive influence on bone mineral density. For other antihypertensive drugs, the data are conflicting, indicating that they may have a potentially negative or positive influence on bone mineral density and fracture risk reduction. Some studies did not find a correlation between the use of antihypertensives and bone mineral density. Due to the frequent coexistence of hypertension and osteoporosis, when selecting long-term antihypertensive therapy the potential effects of antihypertensive drugs on development, worsening, or improvement of osteoporosis should also be considered. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 67 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 25% |
| Researcher | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 12 | 18% |
| Unknown | 14 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 7% |
| Engineering | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 17 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 February 2013.
All research outputs
#20,182,546
of 22,696,971 outputs
Outputs from Calcified Tissue International
#1,568
of 1,756 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#245,668
of 277,055 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Calcified Tissue International
#15
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,696,971 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,756 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,055 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.