Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2000;2000(4):CD002825.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002825.

Fluoride for treating postmenopausal osteoporosis

Affiliations
Review

Fluoride for treating postmenopausal osteoporosis

D Haguenauer et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000.

Abstract

Objectives: To assess the efficacy of fluoride therapy on bone loss, vertebral and non-vertebral fractures and side effects in postmenopausal women.

Search strategy: We searched Medline, Current Contents and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Registry up to December 1998.

Selection criteria: Two independent reviewers selected RCTs which met predetermined inclusion criteria.

Data collection and analysis: Two reviewers independently extracted data using predetermined forms and assessed the methodological quality of the trials using a validated scale. For dichotomous outcomes, relative risks (RR) were calculated and for continuous outcomes, weighted mean differences (WMD) of percentage change from baseline were calculated. Where heterogeneity existed (determined by a chi-square test) a random effects model was used.

Main results: Eleven studies (1429 subjects) met the inclusion criteria. The increase in lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) was found to be higher in the treatment group than in the control group with a WMD 8.1% (95%CI: 7.15,9.09) after two years of treatment and 16.1%(95%CI: 14.65,17.5) after four years. The RR for new vertebral fractures was not significant at two years [0.87 (95%CI: 0.51,1.46)] or at four years [0.9(95%CI: 0.71,1.14)]. The RR for new non-vertebral fractures was not significant at two years 1.2(95%CI: 0.68,2.1) but was increased at four years in the treated group 1.85(95%CI: 1.36,2.5), especially if used at high doses and in a non slow release form. The RR for gastrointestinal side effects was not significant at two years 2.18(95%CI: 0.86,1.21) but was increased at four years in the treated group 2.18(95%CI: 1.69,4.57) especially if fluoride was used at high doses and in a non slow release form. The number of withdrawals and dropouts was not different between treated and control groups at two and four years.

Reviewer's conclusions: Although fluoride has an ability to increase BMD at lumbar spine, it does not result in a reduction of vertebral fractures. In increasing the dose of fluoride, one increases the risk of non-vertebral fracture and gastrointestinal side effects without any effect on the vertebral fracture rate.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None known.

Figures

1.1
1.1. Analysis
Comparison 1 Fluoride vs Placebo ‐ Overall, Outcome 1 No. People with new vertebral fractures ‐ 2 years.
1.2
1.2. Analysis
Comparison 1 Fluoride vs Placebo ‐ Overall, Outcome 2 No. People with new vertebral fractures ‐ 4 years.
1.3
1.3. Analysis
Comparison 1 Fluoride vs Placebo ‐ Overall, Outcome 3 Forearm BMD/C % 2 years from baseline.
1.4
1.4. Analysis
Comparison 1 Fluoride vs Placebo ‐ Overall, Outcome 4 Forearm BMD/C% 4 years from baseline.
1.5
1.5. Analysis
Comparison 1 Fluoride vs Placebo ‐ Overall, Outcome 5 Total body BMD% from baseline.
1.6
1.6. Analysis
Comparison 1 Fluoride vs Placebo ‐ Overall, Outcome 6 Legs BMD % from baseline.
1.7
1.7. Analysis
Comparison 1 Fluoride vs Placebo ‐ Overall, Outcome 7 Arms BMD % from baseline.
1.8
1.8. Analysis
Comparison 1 Fluoride vs Placebo ‐ Overall, Outcome 8 Femoral trochanter BMD % from baseline 4 years.
1.9
1.9. Analysis
Comparison 1 Fluoride vs Placebo ‐ Overall, Outcome 9 Pain mobility score‐ change from baseline.
1.10
1.10. Analysis
Comparison 1 Fluoride vs Placebo ‐ Overall, Outcome 10 Best available hip % from baseline 2 years.
1.11
1.11. Analysis
Comparison 1 Fluoride vs Placebo ‐ Overall, Outcome 11 Best available hip % from baseline 4 years.
1.12
1.12. Analysis
Comparison 1 Fluoride vs Placebo ‐ Overall, Outcome 12 Height % from baseline 4 years.
1.13
1.13. Analysis
Comparison 1 Fluoride vs Placebo ‐ Overall, Outcome 13 Lumbar BMD % from baseline 2 years.
1.14
1.14. Analysis
Comparison 1 Fluoride vs Placebo ‐ Overall, Outcome 14 Lumbar BMD % from baseline 4 years.
2.1
2.1. Analysis
Comparison 2 Side effects, Outcome 1 GI Minor Overall.
2.2
2.2. Analysis
Comparison 2 Side effects, Outcome 2 GI minor overall 2 years.
2.3
2.3. Analysis
Comparison 2 Side effects, Outcome 3 GI minor overall 4 years.
2.4
2.4. Analysis
Comparison 2 Side effects, Outcome 4 GI Minor Nausea.
2.5
2.5. Analysis
Comparison 2 Side effects, Outcome 5 GI Minor pain.
2.6
2.6. Analysis
Comparison 2 Side effects, Outcome 6 GI Minor Dyspepsia.
2.7
2.7. Analysis
Comparison 2 Side effects, Outcome 7 GI major Overall.
3.1
3.1. Analysis
Comparison 3 Number of patients with new nonvertebral fractures, Outcome 1 Nonvertebral fractures overall.
3.2
3.2. Analysis
Comparison 3 Number of patients with new nonvertebral fractures, Outcome 2 Pelvis 4 years.
3.3
3.3. Analysis
Comparison 3 Number of patients with new nonvertebral fractures, Outcome 3 Proximal Femur 4 years.
3.4
3.4. Analysis
Comparison 3 Number of patients with new nonvertebral fractures, Outcome 4 Hip 2 years.
3.5
3.5. Analysis
Comparison 3 Number of patients with new nonvertebral fractures, Outcome 5 Foot 2 years.
3.6
3.6. Analysis
Comparison 3 Number of patients with new nonvertebral fractures, Outcome 6 Tibia 2 years.
3.7
3.7. Analysis
Comparison 3 Number of patients with new nonvertebral fractures, Outcome 7 Humerus 4 years.
3.8
3.8. Analysis
Comparison 3 Number of patients with new nonvertebral fractures, Outcome 8 Wrist 2 years.
3.9
3.9. Analysis
Comparison 3 Number of patients with new nonvertebral fractures, Outcome 9 Rib 2 years.
3.10
3.10. Analysis
Comparison 3 Number of patients with new nonvertebral fractures, Outcome 10 Fissures or microfractures.
3.11
3.11. Analysis
Comparison 3 Number of patients with new nonvertebral fractures, Outcome 11 Bone spurs.
3.12
3.12. Analysis
Comparison 3 Number of patients with new nonvertebral fractures, Outcome 12 Traumatic fractures.
3.13
3.13. Analysis
Comparison 3 Number of patients with new nonvertebral fractures, Outcome 13 Non vertebral fracture overall 2 years.
3.14
3.14. Analysis
Comparison 3 Number of patients with new nonvertebral fractures, Outcome 14 Non vertebral fracture overall 4 years.
3.15
3.15. Analysis
Comparison 3 Number of patients with new nonvertebral fractures, Outcome 15 Rib 4 years.
3.16
3.16. Analysis
Comparison 3 Number of patients with new nonvertebral fractures, Outcome 16 Hip 4 years.
3.17
3.17. Analysis
Comparison 3 Number of patients with new nonvertebral fractures, Outcome 17 Wrist 4 years.
3.18
3.18. Analysis
Comparison 3 Number of patients with new nonvertebral fractures, Outcome 18 Foot 4 years.
3.19
3.19. Analysis
Comparison 3 Number of patients with new nonvertebral fractures, Outcome 19 Tibia 4 years.
4.1
4.1. Analysis
Comparison 4 Musculoskeletal pain, Outcome 1 Lower limb pain 2 years.
4.2
4.2. Analysis
Comparison 4 Musculoskeletal pain, Outcome 2 Lower limb pain 4 years.
4.3
4.3. Analysis
Comparison 4 Musculoskeletal pain, Outcome 3 Finger paresthesia.
5.1
5.1. Analysis
Comparison 5 Withdrawals and dropouts, Outcome 1 Withdrawals and dropouts overall.
5.2
5.2. Analysis
Comparison 5 Withdrawals and dropouts, Outcome 2 Withdrawals and dropouts 2 years.
5.3
5.3. Analysis
Comparison 5 Withdrawals and dropouts, Outcome 3 Withdrawals and dropouts 4 years.
6.1
6.1. Analysis
Comparison 6 Subgroup Analysis: Type of Fluoride, Outcome 1 No. People with new vertebral fractures‐2 years.
6.2
6.2. Analysis
Comparison 6 Subgroup Analysis: Type of Fluoride, Outcome 2 No. People with new vertebral fractures 4 years.
6.3
6.3. Analysis
Comparison 6 Subgroup Analysis: Type of Fluoride, Outcome 3 Lumbar BMD % 2 years from baseline.
6.4
6.4. Analysis
Comparison 6 Subgroup Analysis: Type of Fluoride, Outcome 4 Lumbar BMD % 4 years from baseline.
6.5
6.5. Analysis
Comparison 6 Subgroup Analysis: Type of Fluoride, Outcome 5 GI minor overall.
6.6
6.6. Analysis
Comparison 6 Subgroup Analysis: Type of Fluoride, Outcome 6 GI minor 2 years.
6.7
6.7. Analysis
Comparison 6 Subgroup Analysis: Type of Fluoride, Outcome 7 GI minor 4 years.
6.8
6.8. Analysis
Comparison 6 Subgroup Analysis: Type of Fluoride, Outcome 8 Non vertebral fractures overall.
6.9
6.9. Analysis
Comparison 6 Subgroup Analysis: Type of Fluoride, Outcome 9 Non vertebral fractures 2 years.
6.10
6.10. Analysis
Comparison 6 Subgroup Analysis: Type of Fluoride, Outcome 10 Non vertebral fractures 4 years.
6.11
6.11. Analysis
Comparison 6 Subgroup Analysis: Type of Fluoride, Outcome 11 Lower limb pain syndrome.
6.12
6.12. Analysis
Comparison 6 Subgroup Analysis: Type of Fluoride, Outcome 12 Withdrawals and dropouts overall.
6.13
6.13. Analysis
Comparison 6 Subgroup Analysis: Type of Fluoride, Outcome 13 Withdrawals and dropouts 2 years.
6.14
6.14. Analysis
Comparison 6 Subgroup Analysis: Type of Fluoride, Outcome 14 Withdrawals and dropouts 4 years.
7.1
7.1. Analysis
Comparison 7 Sensitivity Dosage: Fluoride vs Placebo, Outcome 1 No. People with new vertebral fractures‐2 years.
7.2
7.2. Analysis
Comparison 7 Sensitivity Dosage: Fluoride vs Placebo, Outcome 2 No. People with new vertebral fractures 4 years.
7.3
7.3. Analysis
Comparison 7 Sensitivity Dosage: Fluoride vs Placebo, Outcome 3 Lumbar BMD % 2 years from baseline.
7.4
7.4. Analysis
Comparison 7 Sensitivity Dosage: Fluoride vs Placebo, Outcome 4 Lumbar BMD % 4 years from baseline.
7.5
7.5. Analysis
Comparison 7 Sensitivity Dosage: Fluoride vs Placebo, Outcome 5 GI minor overall.
7.6
7.6. Analysis
Comparison 7 Sensitivity Dosage: Fluoride vs Placebo, Outcome 6 GI minor 2 years.
7.7
7.7. Analysis
Comparison 7 Sensitivity Dosage: Fluoride vs Placebo, Outcome 7 GI minor 4 years.
7.8
7.8. Analysis
Comparison 7 Sensitivity Dosage: Fluoride vs Placebo, Outcome 8 Non vertebral fractures overall.
7.9
7.9. Analysis
Comparison 7 Sensitivity Dosage: Fluoride vs Placebo, Outcome 9 Non vertebral fractures 2 years.
7.10
7.10. Analysis
Comparison 7 Sensitivity Dosage: Fluoride vs Placebo, Outcome 10 Non vertebral fractures 4 years.
7.11
7.11. Analysis
Comparison 7 Sensitivity Dosage: Fluoride vs Placebo, Outcome 11 Lower limb pain syndrome.
7.12
7.12. Analysis
Comparison 7 Sensitivity Dosage: Fluoride vs Placebo, Outcome 12 Withdrawals and dropouts overall.
7.13
7.13. Analysis
Comparison 7 Sensitivity Dosage: Fluoride vs Placebo, Outcome 13 Withdrawals and dropouts 2 yeras.
7.14
7.14. Analysis
Comparison 7 Sensitivity Dosage: Fluoride vs Placebo, Outcome 14 Withdrawals and dropouts 4 years.
8.1
8.1. Analysis
Comparison 8 Sensitivity Quality, Outcome 1 No. People with new vertebral fractures‐2 years.
8.2
8.2. Analysis
Comparison 8 Sensitivity Quality, Outcome 2 No. Peiple with new vertebral fractures 4 years.
8.3
8.3. Analysis
Comparison 8 Sensitivity Quality, Outcome 3 Lumbar BMD % 2 years from baseline.
8.4
8.4. Analysis
Comparison 8 Sensitivity Quality, Outcome 4 Lumbar BMD % 4 years from baseline.
8.5
8.5. Analysis
Comparison 8 Sensitivity Quality, Outcome 5 GI minor overall.
8.6
8.6. Analysis
Comparison 8 Sensitivity Quality, Outcome 6 GI minor 2 years.
8.7
8.7. Analysis
Comparison 8 Sensitivity Quality, Outcome 7 GI minor 4 years.
8.8
8.8. Analysis
Comparison 8 Sensitivity Quality, Outcome 8 Non vertebral fractures overall.
8.9
8.9. Analysis
Comparison 8 Sensitivity Quality, Outcome 9 Non vertebral fractures 2 years.
8.10
8.10. Analysis
Comparison 8 Sensitivity Quality, Outcome 10 Non vertebral fractures 4 years.
8.11
8.11. Analysis
Comparison 8 Sensitivity Quality, Outcome 11 Withdrawals and dropouts overall.
8.12
8.12. Analysis
Comparison 8 Sensitivity Quality, Outcome 12 Lower limb pain syndrome.
8.13
8.13. Analysis
Comparison 8 Sensitivity Quality, Outcome 13 Withdrawals and dropouts 2 years.
8.14
8.14. Analysis
Comparison 8 Sensitivity Quality, Outcome 14 Withdrawals and dropouts 4 years.
9.1
9.1. Analysis
Comparison 9 Subgroup men/women, Outcome 1 No. People with new vertebral fractures‐2 years.
9.2
9.2. Analysis
Comparison 9 Subgroup men/women, Outcome 2 No. People with new vertebral fractures 4 years.
9.3
9.3. Analysis
Comparison 9 Subgroup men/women, Outcome 3 Lumbar BMD % 2 years from baseline.
9.4
9.4. Analysis
Comparison 9 Subgroup men/women, Outcome 4 Lumbar BMD % 4 years from baseline.
9.5
9.5. Analysis
Comparison 9 Subgroup men/women, Outcome 5 GI minor overall.
9.6
9.6. Analysis
Comparison 9 Subgroup men/women, Outcome 6 GI minor 2 years.
9.7
9.7. Analysis
Comparison 9 Subgroup men/women, Outcome 7 GI minor 4 years.
9.8
9.8. Analysis
Comparison 9 Subgroup men/women, Outcome 8 Non vertebral fractures overall.
9.9
9.9. Analysis
Comparison 9 Subgroup men/women, Outcome 9 Non vertebral fractures 2 years.
9.10
9.10. Analysis
Comparison 9 Subgroup men/women, Outcome 10 Non vertebral fractures 4 years.
9.11
9.11. Analysis
Comparison 9 Subgroup men/women, Outcome 11 Lower limb pain syndrome.
9.12
9.12. Analysis
Comparison 9 Subgroup men/women, Outcome 12 Withdrawals and dropouts overall.
9.13
9.13. Analysis
Comparison 9 Subgroup men/women, Outcome 13 Withdrawals and dropouts 2 years.
9.14
9.14. Analysis
Comparison 9 Subgroup men/women, Outcome 14 Withdrawals and dropouts 4 years.
10.1
10.1. Analysis
Comparison 10 Subgroup Vit D/ no vit D = EC/Non EC, Outcome 1 No. People with new vertebral fractures‐2 years.
10.2
10.2. Analysis
Comparison 10 Subgroup Vit D/ no vit D = EC/Non EC, Outcome 2 No. People with new vertebral fractures 4 years.
10.3
10.3. Analysis
Comparison 10 Subgroup Vit D/ no vit D = EC/Non EC, Outcome 3 Lumbar BMD % 2 years from baseline.
10.4
10.4. Analysis
Comparison 10 Subgroup Vit D/ no vit D = EC/Non EC, Outcome 4 Lumbar BMD % 4 years from baseline.
10.5
10.5. Analysis
Comparison 10 Subgroup Vit D/ no vit D = EC/Non EC, Outcome 5 GI minor overall.
10.6
10.6. Analysis
Comparison 10 Subgroup Vit D/ no vit D = EC/Non EC, Outcome 6 GI minor 2 years.
10.7
10.7. Analysis
Comparison 10 Subgroup Vit D/ no vit D = EC/Non EC, Outcome 7 GI minor 4 years.
10.8
10.8. Analysis
Comparison 10 Subgroup Vit D/ no vit D = EC/Non EC, Outcome 8 Non vertebral fractures overall.
10.9
10.9. Analysis
Comparison 10 Subgroup Vit D/ no vit D = EC/Non EC, Outcome 9 Non vertebral fractures 2 years.
10.10
10.10. Analysis
Comparison 10 Subgroup Vit D/ no vit D = EC/Non EC, Outcome 10 Non vertebral fractures 4 years.
10.11
10.11. Analysis
Comparison 10 Subgroup Vit D/ no vit D = EC/Non EC, Outcome 11 Lower limb pain syndrome.
10.12
10.12. Analysis
Comparison 10 Subgroup Vit D/ no vit D = EC/Non EC, Outcome 12 Withdrawals and dropouts overall.
10.13
10.13. Analysis
Comparison 10 Subgroup Vit D/ no vit D = EC/Non EC, Outcome 13 Withdrawals and dropouts 2 years.
10.14
10.14. Analysis
Comparison 10 Subgroup Vit D/ no vit D = EC/Non EC, Outcome 14 Withdrawals and dropouts 4 years.
11.1
11.1. Analysis
Comparison 11 Subgroup HRT/non HRT, Outcome 1 No. People with new vertebral fractures‐2 years.
11.2
11.2. Analysis
Comparison 11 Subgroup HRT/non HRT, Outcome 2 No. People with new vertebral fractures 4 years.
11.3
11.3. Analysis
Comparison 11 Subgroup HRT/non HRT, Outcome 3 Lumbar BMD % 2 years from baseline.
11.4
11.4. Analysis
Comparison 11 Subgroup HRT/non HRT, Outcome 4 Lumbar BMD % 4 years from baseline.
11.5
11.5. Analysis
Comparison 11 Subgroup HRT/non HRT, Outcome 5 GI minor overall.
11.6
11.6. Analysis
Comparison 11 Subgroup HRT/non HRT, Outcome 6 GI minor 2 years.
11.7
11.7. Analysis
Comparison 11 Subgroup HRT/non HRT, Outcome 7 GI minor 4 years.
11.8
11.8. Analysis
Comparison 11 Subgroup HRT/non HRT, Outcome 8 Non vertebral fractures overall.
11.9
11.9. Analysis
Comparison 11 Subgroup HRT/non HRT, Outcome 9 Non vertebral fractures 2 years.
11.10
11.10. Analysis
Comparison 11 Subgroup HRT/non HRT, Outcome 10 Non vertebral fractures 4 years.
11.11
11.11. Analysis
Comparison 11 Subgroup HRT/non HRT, Outcome 11 Lower limb pain syndrome.
11.12
11.12. Analysis
Comparison 11 Subgroup HRT/non HRT, Outcome 12 Withdrawals and dropouts overall.
11.13
11.13. Analysis
Comparison 11 Subgroup HRT/non HRT, Outcome 13 Withdrawals and dropouts 2 years.
11.14
11.14. Analysis
Comparison 11 Subgroup HRT/non HRT, Outcome 14 Withdrawals and dropouts 4 years.
12.1
12.1. Analysis
Comparison 12 Subgroup SR/non SR, Outcome 1 No. People with new vertebral fractures‐2 years.
12.2
12.2. Analysis
Comparison 12 Subgroup SR/non SR, Outcome 2 No. People with new vertebral fractures 4 years.
12.3
12.3. Analysis
Comparison 12 Subgroup SR/non SR, Outcome 3 Lumbar BMD % 2 years from baseline.
12.4
12.4. Analysis
Comparison 12 Subgroup SR/non SR, Outcome 4 Lumbar BMD % 4 years from baseline.
12.5
12.5. Analysis
Comparison 12 Subgroup SR/non SR, Outcome 5 GI minor overall.
12.6
12.6. Analysis
Comparison 12 Subgroup SR/non SR, Outcome 6 GI minor 2 years.
12.7
12.7. Analysis
Comparison 12 Subgroup SR/non SR, Outcome 7 GI minor 4 years.
12.8
12.8. Analysis
Comparison 12 Subgroup SR/non SR, Outcome 8 Non vertebral fractures overall.
12.9
12.9. Analysis
Comparison 12 Subgroup SR/non SR, Outcome 9 Non vertebral fractures 2 years.
12.10
12.10. Analysis
Comparison 12 Subgroup SR/non SR, Outcome 10 Non vertebral fractures 4 years.
12.11
12.11. Analysis
Comparison 12 Subgroup SR/non SR, Outcome 11 Lower limb pain syndrome.
12.12
12.12. Analysis
Comparison 12 Subgroup SR/non SR, Outcome 12 Withdrawals and dropouts overall.
12.13
12.13. Analysis
Comparison 12 Subgroup SR/non SR, Outcome 13 Withdrawals and dropouts 2 years.
12.14
12.14. Analysis
Comparison 12 Subgroup SR/non SR, Outcome 14 Withdrawals and dropouts 4 years.
13.1
13.1. Analysis
Comparison 13 Subgroup Ca dosage and/or vit D, Outcome 1 No. people with new vertebral fracture 2 years.
13.2
13.2. Analysis
Comparison 13 Subgroup Ca dosage and/or vit D, Outcome 2 No. people with new vertebral fracture 4 years.
13.3
13.3. Analysis
Comparison 13 Subgroup Ca dosage and/or vit D, Outcome 3 Lumbar BMD % 2 years from baseline.
13.4
13.4. Analysis
Comparison 13 Subgroup Ca dosage and/or vit D, Outcome 4 Lumbar BMD % 4 years from baseline.
13.5
13.5. Analysis
Comparison 13 Subgroup Ca dosage and/or vit D, Outcome 5 GI minor overall.
13.6
13.6. Analysis
Comparison 13 Subgroup Ca dosage and/or vit D, Outcome 6 GI minor 2 years.
13.7
13.7. Analysis
Comparison 13 Subgroup Ca dosage and/or vit D, Outcome 7 GI minor 4 years.
13.8
13.8. Analysis
Comparison 13 Subgroup Ca dosage and/or vit D, Outcome 8 Non vertebral fractures overall.
13.9
13.9. Analysis
Comparison 13 Subgroup Ca dosage and/or vit D, Outcome 9 Non vertebral fractures 2 years.
13.10
13.10. Analysis
Comparison 13 Subgroup Ca dosage and/or vit D, Outcome 10 Non vertebral fractures 4 years.
13.11
13.11. Analysis
Comparison 13 Subgroup Ca dosage and/or vit D, Outcome 11 Lower limb pain syndrome.
13.12
13.12. Analysis
Comparison 13 Subgroup Ca dosage and/or vit D, Outcome 12 Withdrawals and dropouts overall.
13.13
13.13. Analysis
Comparison 13 Subgroup Ca dosage and/or vit D, Outcome 13 Withdrawals and dropouts 2 years.
13.14
13.14. Analysis
Comparison 13 Subgroup Ca dosage and/or vit D, Outcome 14 Withdrawals and dropouts 4 years.
14.1
14.1. Analysis
Comparison 14 Subgroup Osteoporosis definition, Outcome 1 No. People with new vertebral fractures ‐ 2 years.
14.2
14.2. Analysis
Comparison 14 Subgroup Osteoporosis definition, Outcome 2 No. People with new vertebral fractures ‐ 4 years.
14.3
14.3. Analysis
Comparison 14 Subgroup Osteoporosis definition, Outcome 3 Lumbar BMD % from baseline 2 years.
14.4
14.4. Analysis
Comparison 14 Subgroup Osteoporosis definition, Outcome 4 Lumbar BMD % from baseline 4 years.
14.5
14.5. Analysis
Comparison 14 Subgroup Osteoporosis definition, Outcome 5 GI minor overall.
14.6
14.6. Analysis
Comparison 14 Subgroup Osteoporosis definition, Outcome 6 GI minor 2 years.
14.7
14.7. Analysis
Comparison 14 Subgroup Osteoporosis definition, Outcome 7 GI minor 4 years.
14.8
14.8. Analysis
Comparison 14 Subgroup Osteoporosis definition, Outcome 8 Non vertebral fractures overall.
14.9
14.9. Analysis
Comparison 14 Subgroup Osteoporosis definition, Outcome 9 Non vertebral fractures 2 years.
14.10
14.10. Analysis
Comparison 14 Subgroup Osteoporosis definition, Outcome 10 Non vertebral fractures 4 years.
14.11
14.11. Analysis
Comparison 14 Subgroup Osteoporosis definition, Outcome 11 Lower limb pain syndrome.
14.12
14.12. Analysis
Comparison 14 Subgroup Osteoporosis definition, Outcome 12 Withdrawals and dropouts overall.
14.13
14.13. Analysis
Comparison 14 Subgroup Osteoporosis definition, Outcome 13 Withdrawals and dropouts 2 years.
14.14
14.14. Analysis
Comparison 14 Subgroup Osteoporosis definition, Outcome 14 Withdrawals and dropouts 4 years.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

References to studies included in this review

Christiansen 1980 {published data only}
    1. Christiansen C, Christensen MS, McNair P, et al. Prevention of early postmenopausal bone loss: controlled 2‐year study in 315 normal females.. Eur J Clin Invest 1980;10(4):273‐279. - PubMed
Gambacciani 1995 {published data only}
    1. Gambacciani M, Spinetti A, Taponeco F, et al. Treatment of postmenopausal vertebral osteopenia with monofluorophospate: a long‐term calcium‐controlled study. Osteoporosis International 1995;5(6):467‐471. - PubMed
Grove 1981 {published data only}
    1. Grove O, Halver B. Relief of osteoporotic backache with fluoride, calcium, and calciferol. Acta Med Scand 1981;209(6):469‐471. - PubMed
Hansson 1987 {published data only}
    1. Hansson T, Roos B. The effect of fluoride and calcium on spinal bone mineral content: a controlled, prospective (3 years) study. Calcif Tissue Int 1987;40(6):315‐317. - PubMed
Kleerekoper 1991 {published data only}
    1. Kleerekoper M, Peterson EL, Nelson DA, et al. A randomized trial of sodium fluoride as a treatment for postmenopausal osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 1991;1(3):155‐161. - PubMed
Meunier 1998 {published data only}
    1. Meunier PJ, Sebert JL, Reginster JY, et al. Fluoride salts are no better at preventing new vertebral fractures than calcium‐vitamin D in postmenopausal osteoporosis: the FAVOStudy. Osteoporos Int 1998;8:4‐12. - PubMed
Pak 1994a {published data only}
    1. Pak CY, Sakhaee K, Piziak V, et al. Slow‐release sodium fluoride in the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis. A randomized controlled trial [see comments]. Ann Intern Med 1994;120(8):625‐632. - PubMed
Pak 1995 {published data only}
    1. Pak CY, Sakhaee K, Adams‐Huet B, et al. Treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis with slow‐release sodium fluoride. Final report of a randomized controlled trial [see comments]. Ann Intern Med 1995b;123(6):401‐408. - PubMed
Reginster 1998 {published data only}
    1. Reginster JY, Meurmans L, Zegels B, et al. The effect of sodium monofluorophosphate plus calcium on vertebral fracture rate in postmenopausal women with moderate osteoporosis. A randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 1998;129(1):1‐8. - PubMed
Riggs 1982 {published data only}
    1. Riggs BL, Seeman E, Hodgson SF, Taves DR, O'Fallon WM. Effect of the fluoride/calcium regimen on vertebral fracture occurrence in postmenopausal osteoporosis. Comparison with conventional therapy. N Engl J Med 1982;306(8):446‐450. - PubMed
Riggs 1990 {published data only}
    1. Riggs BL, Hodgson SF, O'Fallon WM, et al. Effect of fluoride treatment on the fracture rate in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. N Engl J Med 1990;322(12):802‐809. - PubMed
Sebert 1995 {published data only}
    1. Sebert JL, Richard P, Mennecier I, Bisset JP, Loeb G. Monofluorophosphate increases lumbar bone density in osteopenic patients: a double‐masked randomized study. Osteoporos Int 1995;5(2):108‐114. - PubMed

References to studies excluded from this review

Affinito 1993 {published data only}
    1. Affinito P, Di CC, Primizia M, et al. A new fluoride preparation for the prevention of postmenopausal osteoporosis: calcium monofluorophosphate. Gynecological Endocrinology 1993;7(3):201‐205. - PubMed
Antich 1993 {published data only}
    1. Antich PP, Pak CY, Gonzales J, et al. Measurement of intrinsic bone quality in vivo by reflection ultrasound: correction of impaired quality with slow‐release sodium fluoride and calcium citrate.. Journal of Bone & Mineral Research 1993;8(3):301‐311. - PubMed
Battmann 1997 {published data only}
    1. Battmann A, Resch H, Libanati CR, et al. Serum fluoride and serum osteocalcin levels in response to a novel sustained‐release monofluorophosphate preparation: comparison with plain monofluorophosphate. Osteoporosis International 1997;7(1):48‐51. - PubMed
Dambacher 1976 {published data only}
    1. Dambacher MA, Haas HG. [Fluoride therapy of osteoporosis]. [German].. Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift 1976;101(13):504‐506. - PubMed
Dambacher 1986 {published data only}
    1. Dambacher MA, Ittner J, Ruegsegger P. Long‐term fluoride therapy of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Bone 1986;7(3):199‐205. - PubMed
Eriksen 1985 {published data only}
    1. Eriksen EF, Mosekilde L, Melsen F. Effect of sodium fluoride, calcium, phosphate, and vitamin D2 on trabecular bone balance and remodeling in osteoporotics. Bone 1985;6(5):381‐389. - PubMed
Erlacher 1994 {published data only}
    1. Erlacher L, Teufelsbauer H, Bernecker P, Pietschmann P, Weissel M. Comparison of serum fluoride levels after administration of monofluorophosphate‐calcium carbonate or sodium fluoride: differences in peak serum concentrations. Clinical Investigator 1994;72(12):1082‐1085. - PubMed
Hedlund 1989 {published data only}
    1. Hedlund LR, Gallagher JC. Increased incidence of hip fracture in osteoporotic women treated with sodium fluoride. Journal of Bone & Mineral Research 1989;4(2):223‐225. - PubMed
Inkovaara 1973 {published data only}
    1. Inkovaara J, Hanhijarvi H, Iisalo E, Jarvinen K. Fluoride and osteoporosis. British Medical Journal 1973;1(853):613‐. - PMC - PubMed
Inkovaara 1975 {published data only}
    1. Inkovaara J, Heikinheimo R, Jarvinen K, et al. Prophylactic fluoride treatment and aged bones. British Medical Journal 1975;3(5975):73‐74. - PMC - PubMed
Jowsey 1971 {published data only}
    1. Jowsey J, Riggs BL, Kelly PJ, Hoffman DL. Effect of combined therapy with sodium fluoride, vitamin D, and calcium in osteoporosis. Journal of Laboratory & Clinical Medicine 1971;78(6):994‐995. - PubMed
Jowsey 1972 {published data only}
    1. Jowsey J, Riggs BL, Kelly PJ, Hoffmann DL. Effect of combined therapy with sodium fluoride, vitamin D and calcium in osteoporosis. American Journal of Medicine 1972;53(1):43‐49. - PubMed
Jowsey 1975 {published data only}
    1. Jowsey J, Riggs BL. Letter: Prophylactic fluoride treatment and aged bones. British Medical Journal 1975;3(5986):766‐. - PMC - PubMed
Riggs 1973 {published data only}
    1. Riggs BL, Jowsey J, Kelly PJ, Hoffman DL, Arnaud CD. Studies on pathogenesis and treatment in postmenopausal and senile osteoporosis. Clinics in Endocrinology & Metabolism 1973;2(2):317‐332. - PubMed
Riggs 1994 {published data only}
    1. Riggs BL, O'Fallon WM, Lane A, et al. Clinical trial of fluoride therapy in postmenopausal osteoporotic women: extended observations and additional analysis. J Bone Miner Res 1994;9(2):265‐275. - PubMed
Ringe 1987 {published data only}
    1. Ringe JD. [Combined fluoride therapy for primary osteoporosis. Results of two‐years' treatment with sodium monofluorophosphate and calcium]. [German]. Fortschritte der Medizin 1987;105(19):379‐382. - PubMed
Ringe 1998 {published data only}
    1. Ringe JD, Drost DJ, Kipshoven C, Rovati LC, Setnikar I. Avoidance of vertebral fractures in men with idiopathic osteoporosis by a three year therapy with calcium and low‐dose intermittent monofluorophosphate. Osteoporos Int 1998;8:47‐52. - PubMed
Takizawa 1980 {published data only}
    1. Takizawa H, Igarashi M, Hayashi Y, Karube S, Kimura H. [Comparison of treatments in senile osteoporosis: follow up for 12 months (author's transl)]. [Japanese]. Journal of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association ‐ Nippon Seikeigeka Gakkai Zasshi 1980;54(4):345‐355. - PubMed
Vose 1978 {published data only}
    1. Vose GP, Keele DK, Milner AM, et al. Effect of sodium fluoride, inorganic phosphate, and oxymetholone therapies in osteoporosis: a six year progress report. J Gerontol 1978;33:204‐212. - PubMed

Additional references

Aaron 1991
    1. Aaron JE, de VC, Kanis JA. The effect of sodium fluoride on trabecular architecture. Bone 1991;12(5):307‐310. - PubMed
Bardin 1995
    1. Bardin T, Kuntz D. [Medicaments stimulant la formation osseuse]. In: Medicine‐Sciences Flammarion, editor(s). Therapeutique Rhumatologique. Paris, 1995:105‐111.
Boivin 1991
    1. Boivin G, Grousson B, Meunier PJ. X‐rays microanalysis of fluoride distribution in microfracture calluses in cancellous iliac bone from osteoporotic patients treated with fluoride and untreated. J Bone Miner Res 1991;6:1183‐1190. - PubMed
CDC 1994
    1. Anonymous. Consensus Development Conference: Diagnosis, prophylaxis and treatment of osteroporosis. Am J Med 1994:646‐650. - PubMed
Cranney 1999
    1. Cranney A, Welch V, Tugwell P, et al. Responsiveness of endpoints in osteoporosis clinical trials‐an update. J Rheumatol 1999;26:222‐228. - PubMed
Delmas 1990
    1. Delmas PD, Dupuis J, Duboeuf F, Chapuy MC, Meunier PJ. Treatment of vertebral osteoporosis with disodium monofluorophosphate: comparison with sodium fluoride. J Bone Miner Res 1990;5(Suppl 1):S143‐S147. - PubMed
Delmas 1993
    1. Delmas PD. Biochemical markers of bone turnover: theoretical consideretions and clinical use in osteoporosis. Am J Med 1993;8:348‐354. - PubMed
Dure‐Smith 1996
    1. Dure‐Smith BA, Farley SM, Linkhart SG, Farley JR, Baylink DJ. Calcium deficiency in fluoride‐treated osteoporotic patients despite calcium supplementation. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism 1996;81(1):269‐275. - PubMed
Ettinger 1999
    1. Ettinger B, Black DM, Mitlak BH, et al. Reduction of vertebral fracture risk in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis treated with raloxifene: results from a 3‐year randomized clinical trial. Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation (MORE) Investigators. JAMA 1999;282(7):637‐645. - PubMed
Faulkner 1996
    1. Faulkner KG, Roberts LA, McCung MR. Discrepancies in normative data between Lunar and Hologic DXA sustems. Osteoporos Int 1996;6:432‐436. - PubMed
Fleiss 1993
    1. Fleiss JL. The statistical basis of meta‐analysis. Stat Methods Med Res 1993;2(2):121‐145. - PubMed
Franke 1974
    1. Franke J, Rempel H, Franke M. Three years' experience with sodium‐fluoride therapy of osteoporosis. Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavica 1974;45(1):1‐20. - PubMed
Goeree 1996
    1. Goeree R, O'Brien B, Pettit D, et al. An assessment of the burden of illness due to osteoporosis in Canada. Journal SOGC 1996, (Suppl):15‐24.
Gron 1966
    1. Gron P, McCann HG, Bernstein D. Effect of fluoride on human osteoporotic bone mineral. A chemical and crystallographic study. Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery ‐ American Volume 1966;48(5):892‐898. - PubMed
Harrison 1981
    1. Harrison JE, McNeill KG, Sturtridge WC, et al. Three‐year changes in bone mineral mass of postmenopausal osteoporotic patients based on neutron activation analysis of the central third of the skeleton. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism 1981;52(4):751‐758. - PubMed
Haynes 1994
    1. Haynes RB, Wilczynski N, McKibbon KA, Walker CJ, Sinclair JC. Developing optimal search strategies for detecting clinically sound studies in MEDLINE. J Am Med Info Assoc 1994;1(6):447‐458. - PMC - PubMed
Jadad 1996
    1. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carrol D. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary?. Control Clin Trials 1996;17:1‐12. - PubMed
Kuntz 1984
    1. Kuntz D, Marie P, Naveau B, et al. Extended treatment of primary osteoporosis by sodium fluoride combined with 25 hydroxycholecalciferol. Clinical Rheumatology 1984;3(2):145‐153. - PubMed
Lees 1992
    1. Lees S, Hansson T. Effect of fluoride dosage on bone density, sonic velocity and longitudinal modules of rabbits femur. Calcif Tissue Int 1992;50:88‐92. - PubMed
Lundy 1995
    1. Lundy MW, Stauffer M, Wergedal JE, et al. Histomorphometric analysis of iliac crest bone biopsies in placebo‐treated versus fluoride‐treated subjects [see comments]. Osteoporosis International 1995;5(2):115‐129. - PubMed
Mackerras 1997
    1. Mackerras D, Lumley T. First‐ and second‐year effects in trials of calcium supplementation on the loss of bone density in postmenopausal women. Bone 1997;21(6):527‐533. - PubMed
Mamelle 1988
    1. Mamelle N, Meunier PJ, Dusan R, et al. Risk‐benefit ratio of sodium fluoride treatment in primary vertebral osteoporosis. Lancet 1988;2(8607):361‐365. - PubMed
Merz 1981
    1. Merz W. The essential trace elements. Science 1981;213(1332‐1338). - PubMed
Muller 1992
    1. Muller P, Schmid K, Warnecke G, Stnikar I, Simon B. Sodium fluoride induced gastric mucosal lesions: comparison with sodium monofluorophosphate. Zeitung Gastroenterology 1992;30(252‐254). - PubMed
Mulrow 1997
    1. Mulrow CD, Oxman ADe. Oxford: Update Software; 1997. Cochrane Collaboration Handbook [updated September 1997]. 1997;September 1997 update.
NOF 1998
    1. National Osteoporosis Foundation. Osteoporosis: Review of the evidence for prevention, diagnosis, and treatment and cost‐effectiveness analysis, status report. Osteoporos Int 1998, (Suppl 4):S1‐S88. - PubMed
Orcel 1990
    1. Orcel P, de VC, Prier A, et al. Stress fractures of the lower limbs in osteoporotic patients treated with fluoride. J Bone Miner Res 1990;5(Suppl 1):S191‐S194. - PubMed
Papadimitroupoulos
    1. Papadimitroupoulos EA, Coyte PC, Josse RG, Greenwood CE. Current and projected rates of hip fractures in Canada. CMAJ 1997;157(10):1537‐1566. - PMC - PubMed
Pouilles 1991
    1. Pouilles JM, Tremollieres F, Causse E, Louvet JP, Ribot C. Fluoride therapy in postmenopausal osteopenic women: effect on vertebral and femoral bone density and prediction of bone response. Osteoporos Int 1991;1(2):103‐109. - PubMed
Power 1986
    1. Power GR, Gay JD. Sodium fluoride in the treatment of osteoporosis. Clinical & Investigative Medicine ‐ Medecine Clinique et Experimentale 1986;9(1):41‐43. - PubMed
Resch 1993
    1. Resch H, Libanati C, Farley S, et al. Evidence that fluoride therapy increases trabecular bone density in a peripheral skeletal site. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism 1993;76(6):1622‐1624. - PubMed
Resch 1994
    1. Resch A, Pietschmann F, Bernecker P, et al. [Evidence of fluoride‐induced effects on the calcaneus by measurements of broadband ultrasound attenuation (BUA)]. [German]. Rofo.Fortschritte auf dem Gebiete der Rontgenstrahlen und der Neuen Bildgebenden Verfahren 1994;161(6):547‐550. - PubMed
Rich 1961
    1. Rich C, Ensinck J. Effect of sodium fluoride on calcium metabolism in human beings. Nature 1961;194:184‐185. - PubMed
Sakhaee 1991
    1. Sakhaee K, Pak CY. Fluoride bioavailability from immediate‐released fluoride with calcium carbonate compared with slow release sodium fluoride with calcium citrate. J Bone Miner Res 1991;14:131‐136. - PubMed
Schnitzler 1985
    1. Schnitzler CM, Solomon L. Trabecular stress fractures during fluoride therapy for osteoporosis. Skeletal Radiology 1985;14(4):276‐279. - PubMed
Shea 1999
    1. Shea B, Guyatt G, Cranney A, et al. Meta‐Analysis of Calcium Supplementation for the Prevention of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis. Arch Intern Med 1999;Submitted.
Stamp 1990
    1. Stamp TC, Saphier PW, Loveridge N, et al. Fluoride therapy and parathyroid hormone activity in osteoporosis. Clinical Science 1990;79(3):233‐238. - PubMed
van Kesteren 1982
    1. Kesteren RG, Duursma SA, Visser WJ, et al. Fluoride in bone and serum during treatment of osteoporosis with sodium fluoride, calcium and vitamin D. Metab Bone Dis 1982;4:31‐37. - PubMed
Wells 1997
    1. Wells G, Cranney A, Shea B, Tugwell P. Responsiveness of Endpoints in Osteoporosis Clinical Trials. J Rheumatol 1997;24(6):1230‐1233. - PubMed
Zerwekh 1994
    1. Zerwekh JE, Hagler HK, Sakhaee K, et al. Effect of slow‐release sodium fluoride on cancellous bone histology and connectivity in osteoporosis. Bone 1994;15(6):691‐699. - PubMed
Zerwekh 1997
    1. Zerwekh JE, Padalino P, Pak CY. The effect of intermittent slow‐release sodium fluoride and continuous calcium citrate therapy on calcitropic hormones, biochemical markers of bone metabolism, and blood chemistry in postmenopausal osteoporosis. Calcif Tissue Int 1997;61:272‐278. - PubMed

References to other published versions of this review

Haguenauer 2000
    1. Haguenauer D, Welch V, Shea B, Tugwell P, Adachi JD, Wells G. Fluoride for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporotic fractures: a meta‐analysis. Osteoporosis International 2000;11(9):727‐38. - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources