Randomized controlled trial shows artificial gravity prevents bone marrow adipose tissue increase in bedridden adults, suggesting a potential strategy against bone loss.
Inactivity has been associated with increased bone marrow adipose tissue (BMAT) and bone loss. Artificial gravity (AG) may prevent these complications. This randomized controlled trial investigated the effectiveness of AG at 2g at the feet to prevent lumbar vertebral BMAT accumulation and bone loss. Twenty-four participants (16 male, 8 female) were bedridden for 60 days at 6° head down tilt. They were randomly assigned to bedrest only (n=8), continuous supine centrifugation (cAG; 30 minutes/day), or intermittent supine centrifugation (iAG; 6 bouts of 5 minutes/day). Serial 3T magnetic resonance (MR) measured BMAT while Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry measured bone mineral density (BMD) in the lumbar vertebrae before, during, and after bedrest. After 60 days of bedrest, vertebral BMAT was higher in controls, +3.93% (95%CI -0.28 to 8.14), compared to cAG and iAG interventions. After 60 days of bedrest, male controls BMAT increased 5.81% (95%CI 2.01 to 9.61) compared to -1.35% (95%CI -5.74 to 3.04) and 1.23% (95%CI -1.53 to 3.99) for male cAG and iAG participants respectively. This difference between interventions was significant: X2(2)=8.487, p=0.014. In addition, while control male participants showed decreased BMD after 60 days of bedrest (-0.02g/cm2; 95%CI -0.05 to 0.00), the male participants receiving iAG showed no decrease in BMD during bedrest (0.00g/cm2; 95%CI -0.04 to 0.05). The modulation of BMAT was inversely correlated with BMD at the same vertebrae. Recreating an axial force vector mechanically on horizontalized participants prevented BMAT accumulation and demineralization. These findings suggest exploring technological advances to translate these clinical benefits to populations at risk of acute or chronic bone loss.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Culliton et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: