Prior, J. C., Vigna, Y. M., Schechter, M. T., & Burgess, A. E. (1990). Spinal bone loss and ovulatory disturbances. The New England journal of medicine, 323(18), 1221-1227. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199011013231801
Prior JC, Vigna YM, Schechter MT, Burgess AE. Spinal bone loss and ovulatory disturbances. N Engl J Med. 1990;323(18):1221-1227. doi:10.1056/NEJM199011013231801
Prior, J. C., et al. "Spinal bone loss and ovulatory disturbances." The New England journal of medicine, vol. 323, no. 18, 1990, pp. 1221-1227.
For EndNote, Zotero or Mendeley:
License
No open license is recorded for this paper. Reuse terms are set by the publisher.
Author affiliations
2 institutions
Vancouver Hospital and Health Sciences Centre05p83my93
Osteoporosis develops in women with estrogen deficiency and amenorrhea who lose bone at an accelerated rate. It is not known to what extent bone loss differs between ovulatory women with regular menstrual cycles who are training intensely and those who are sedentary.
Methods
We measured the density of cancellous spinal bone from the 12th thoracic vertebra to the 3rd lumbar vertebra by quantitative computed tomography on two occasions one year apart in 66 premenopausal women 21 to 42 years of age. All the women had two consecutive ovulatory cycles immediately before entering the study. Twenty-one women were training for a marathon, 22 ran regularly but less intensively, and 23 had normal levels of activity. The lengths of the women's menstrual cycles and luteal phases, diet, exercise levels, and hormonal levels were also determined. We defined ovulatory disturbances as anovulatory cycles and cycles with short luteal phases.
Results
The mean (+/- SD) spinal bone density in the 66 women decreased 3.0 +/- 4.8 mg per cubic centimeter per year (2.0 percent per year) (P less than 0.001). Amenorrhea did not develop in any woman during the year of observation (only 2.7 percent of the cycles were greater than 36 days long). Ovulatory disturbances occurred in 29 percent of all cycles, however. Bone loss was strongly associated with these disturbances (r = 0.54, 24 percent of the variance). The 13 women who had anovulatory cycles lost bone mineral at a rate of 6.4 +/- 3.8 mg per cubic centimeter per year (4.2 percent per year). The women training for a marathon had menstrual cycles similar to those of the women in the other two groups.
Conclusion
Decreases in spinal bone density among women with differing exercise habits correlated with asymptomatic disturbances of ovulation (without amenorrhea) and not with physical activity.
Guthardt Y et al., 2026·Sci Rep·Free full text on PubMed Central
This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the relationship between menstrual cycle phases and the incidence of muscle injuries in female team sport athletes, following PRISMA 2020 and PERSiST guidelines. A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus from inception to mid-January 2024. Studies were included if they examined female team sport athletes of reproductive age with regular menstrual cycles and compared the occurrence of muscle injuries across at least two menstrual phases. Studies involving hormonal contraceptive use, medications affecting the menstrual cycle or musculoskeletal system, or menstrual dysfunction were excluded. Three studies met the inclusion criteria, involving 318 participants. Meta-analysis yielded a pooled Risk Ratio of 1.18 (95% CI: 0.75 to 1.86, p = 0.46) for injury risk between the luteal and follicular phases, suggesting no statistically significant association. However, the certainty of the cumulative evidence was rated as very low due to methodological limitations, including inconsistent phase classifications and reliance on imprecise methods for identifying menstrual phases. Consequently, no practical or clinical recommendations can be made at this time. Future research employing standardised, physiologically accurate methods for classifying and detecting menstrual cycle phases is necessary to better understand the potential links between hormonal fluctuations and injury risk.
Healthy premenopausal women with regular cycles are believed to be increasing or maintaining bone density. However, few studies have prospectively documented spinal cancellous bone, the bone that changes rapidly in response to reproductive hormones, in this population. Furthermore, our previous one-year study documented that 24% of the one-year bone change by quantitative computed tomography (QCT) was related to subclinical ovulatory disturbances (short luteal phase and non-ovulation) in the presence of regular menstrual cycles. The purpose of this study was to document the cancellous bone change over five years in this initially ovulatory, premenopausal cohort of 66 healthy women. Thirty-seven women, who continued to be premenopausal and have regular cycles, completed this five-year study. Those enrolled differed only by being older and weighing less than those who could not be contacted (n = 19) or who declined to participate (n = 10). Documentation of current ovulatory characteristics was obtained for at least three cycles in 27 women. At the five-year assessment, the volunteers were 40.6 (range 26-47) years old, weighed 58.5 (41-77) kg, and were 160.9 (149-174) cm in height. All were premenopausal, healthy, nonsmokers with regular menstrual cycles (mean 27.7, range 24-33 days). Six women with intervening events (such as pregnancy or use of oral contraceptives) had interval (12 to 60 months) QCT changes similar to the remaining 31 (-7.98 vs. -4.92 mg/cm, p = 0.1, respectively). Mean five-year QCT was 143.0 +/- 20.2 mg/cm, whereas the initial mean value was 151.9 +/- 20.1 mg/cm. Significant QCT loss over five years (-8.9 +/- 6.2 mg/cm) (95% Cl -6.9 to -11.0) correlated with QCT change in the first year (r = 0.629, p < 0.001). First-year change was not related to the subsequent four-year interval change (r = -0.056, p = 0.74), however. Five-year QCT change was not related to age, weight, osteoporosis family history, estimated calcium intake, or exercise, but did correlate with year one luteal index (luteal/cycle length) (r = 0.339, p = 0.043). Significant cancellous spinal bone loss occurs in healthy, ovulatory premenopausal women, and is influenced by subclinical disturbances of ovulation.
Subclinical ovulatory disturbances (anovulation or short luteal phases within normal-length menstrual cycles) indicate lower progesterone-to-estrogen levels. Given that progesterone plays a bone formation role, subclinical ovulatory disturbances may be associated with bone loss or less than expected bone gain. Our purpose was to perform a meta-analysis of prospective studies in healthy premenopausal women to determine the overall relationship of subclinical ovulatory disturbances to change in bone mineral density. Two reviewers independently identified from serial literature searches 6 studies meeting inclusion criteria: a 2-year study in 114 young adult women, 2006-2009, Vancouver, Canada; a 2-year study in 189 premenopausal women, 2000-2005, Toronto, Canada; a single-cycle study in 14 young women, 1996-1997, Melbourne, Australia; an 18-month study in 53 women, 1990-1995, Santa Clara, California; a 4-year study in 27 women, 1988-1995, Vancouver, Canada; and a 1-year study in 66 women, 1985-1988, Vancouver, Canada. This meta-analysis included a combined sample size of 473 observations in 436 premenopausal women studied over 1-4 years and aged 14-47 years. The percentage of women with ovulatory disturbances varied significantly from 13% to 82%. Women with more frequent ovulatory disturbances had more negative percentage changes in spine bone mineral density (weighted mean difference = -0.86; P = 0.040) for random-effects analysis. There was significant heterogeneity among these 6 studies (I(2) = 80%). In summary, these data show that regularly menstruating women with more frequent ovulatory disturbances experience more negative changes in bone (approximately -0.9% per year). These cycles with silent estrogen/progesterone imbalance may be clinically important.
Exercise is understood to exert positive effects on bone. However cancellous bone has not been shown to increase with exercise. Previous results of our 1-yr observational prospective study in ovulatory women related 20% of the change in cancellous spinal bone mineral density (BMD), measured by quantitative computed tomography (QCT), to luteal phase length (the time from ovulation to menstruation, LL). The 66 women who documented exercise daily included normally active women (N = 23) and those who ran consistently or were increasing running in preparation for a marathon (N = 43). Exercise did not affect BMD change in the women as a whole. We re-evaluated those data to determine whether exercise-related effects on spinal cancellous BMD change in regularly cycling premenopausal women were related to ovulatory characteristics. The potential relationship of exercise to BMD change was reanalyzed by stratifying women into tertiles according to average LL documented by quantitative basal temperature analysis. Repeated-measures ANOVA indicated independent positive effects of both luteal length (P = 0.001) and activity (P = 0.041). The 11 runners with LL > 10.9 d had a nonsignificant 0.5% increase in lumbar BMD while the 15 who averaged short LL (<9.9 d) experienced a significant 3.6% loss. In the runners as a group, however, kilometers run per week was negatively related to BMD change throughout (r = -0.347, P = 0.024). These data are the first to indicate that, in women with regular cycles, luteal length and exercise independently and positively affect change in spinal cancellous BMD.
In their recent article, "Characterization of Perimenopausal Bone Loss," Recker and colleagues present unique longitudinal bone mineral density (BMD) and hormonal data.1 We acknowledge the work involved in recruiting, motivating, and continuing to follow 75 women each for an average of 8 years. The data from this study are an important contribution to our knowledge of bone changes through the natural perimenopausal transition. Unfortunately, these authors have chosen to reduce the complex endocrinological and physiological changes of perimenopause2 to one idea—"estrogen deprivation." Our first concern is that "estrogen deprivation" or "depletion" is not an adequate concept with which to explain the rapid bone loss during perimenopause. The author's own data show that 50% of spinal BMD loss has occurred by 6 months before the final menstrual period at which time estradiol levels are not lower than in the so called "estrogen replete" group. In this study, perimenopausal bone loss appears to begin approximately 3 years before the final menstrual flow, which is about the time when menstrual cycles become irregular.3 Several other studies also show accelerated rates of perimenopausal bone loss.2, 4, 5 During these later phases of perimenopause, estradiol levels can be very high and certainly are not consistently low.2, 6, 7 If estradiol levels are not low in perimenopause, how can we explain the rapid bone loss? First, estradiol levels vary widely.2 Perhaps, acute drops in estradiol levels (often from abnormally high values) cause increased bone resorption much like that which has been shown to occur within seven days of premenopausal ovariectomy.8 A second possibility is that perimenopause causes psychosocial stress.9 Social stress coupled with high estradiol levels in men have been experimentally shown to cause increased cortisol levels10 that are known to be negative for bone. Finally, ovulatory changes that increase as women progress through perimenopause,11 are associated with accelerated cancellous bone loss, despite normal estradiol levels and regular cycles in premenopausal women.12 Replacement of luteal phases with cyclic progestin in a double-blind randomized study in premenopausal women with abnormal cycles caused an important positive change in spinal BMD.13 As a mechanism to allow use of all of their data, the authors labeled "estrogen replete" those women who continued to menstruate as well as those who started hormone therapy before menopause. It seems odd to us to combine data from three women who have undergone ovariectomy and seven women on exogenous hormone therapy with 10 preor perimenopausal women. The estrogen deprivation hypothesis has led the authors to overlook important physiological differences within this group. We request that the data for the 10 untreated preor perimenopausal women be provided and that we be told whether or not they continued to menstruate regularly. In women's life cycle, low levels of estrogen are as natural for menopausal women as for toddlers. To label menopause as a hormone deficiency condition is to ignore the normal hormonal pattern of women's lives. Recker and colleagues suggest that "hormone replacement therapy" should "begin as early as 2 years before the last menstrual period." Although we acknowledge that vasomotor symptoms commonly begin in perimenopause and have a very negative impact on quality of life, we suggest that progesterone would be a more appropriate therapy. Progesterone is truly low at this phase of perimenopause11 and is effective for night sweats/hot flushes. We fear that prescription of estrogen to women in late perimenopause may have negative consequences in both the short and the long-term. In the short term, it may exacerbate symptoms such as breast tenderness, headaches, and fluid retention. In the long term, having experienced side effects from estrogen treatment these women may refuse it when they are menopausal, a time when it has the potential to be valuable therapy. In summary, this important study is flawed because it relies on a clearly inadequate "estrogen deprivation" concept as the sole explanation for differences found in the prospective data from midlife women.
Bone Health › Hormones and Bone › Estrogen and Bone · Reproductive Endocrinology › Ovarian Hormones › Estrogen · Menstrual Cycle › Cycle Disorders › Ovulatory Disturbances
Jerilynn C Prior
J Prior
PMID 2215605 2215605 DOI 10.1056/NEJM199011013231801 10.1056/NEJM199011013231801 Prior et al. 1990, Prior 1990
Cite this article
Prior, J. C., Vigna, Y. M., Schechter, M. T., & Burgess, A. E. (1990). Spinal bone loss and ovulatory disturbances. The New England journal of medicine, 323(18), 1221-1227. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199011013231801
Prior JC, Vigna YM, Schechter MT, Burgess AE. Spinal bone loss and ovulatory disturbances. N Engl J Med. 1990;323(18):1221-1227. doi:10.1056/NEJM199011013231801
Prior, J. C., et al. "Spinal bone loss and ovulatory disturbances." The New England journal of medicine, vol. 323, no. 18, 1990, pp. 1221-1227.