BACKGROUND: The impact of vitamin D supplementation on cardiovascular outcomes and mortality risk reduction remains unclear due to conflicting study findings.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), published between 1983 and 2022, that reported the effect of vitamin D supplementation in adults versus placebo or no treatment on all-cause mortality (ACM), cardiovascular mortality (CVM), non-cardiovascular mortality (non-CVM), and cardiovascular morbidities. Only studies with a follow-up period longer than one year were included. The primary outcomes were ACM and CVM. Secondary outcomes were non-CVM, myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, and major or extended adverse cardiovascular events. Subgroup analyses were performed according to low-, fair- and good-quality RCTs.
RESULTS: Eighty RCTs were assessed, including 82,210 participants receiving vitamin D supplementation and 80,921 receiving placebo or no treatment. The participants' mean (SD) age was 66.1 (11.2) years, and 68.6% were female. Vitamin D supplementation was associated with a lower risk of ACM (OR: 0.95 [95%CI 0.91-0.99] p = 0.013), was close to statistical significance for a lower risk of non-CVM (OR: 0.94 [95%CI 0.87-1.00] p = 0.055), and was not statistically associated with a lower risk of any cardiovascular morbi-mortality outcome. Meta-analysis of low-quality RCTs showed no association with cardiovascular or non-cardiovascular morbi-mortality outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: The emerging results of our meta-analysis present evidence that vitamin D supplementation appears to decrease the risk of ACM (especially convincing in the fair- and good-quality RCTs), while not showing a decrease in the specific cardiovascular morbidity and mortality risk. Thus, we conclude that further research is warranted in this area, with well-planned and executed studies as the basis for more robust recommendations.
OBJECTIVES: To summarize all good quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) interventions in patients with rheumatic diseases.
METHODS: A systematic literature review guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) was performed. We excluded non-English language articles and abstract-only publications. Due to the large number of RCTs identified, we only include "good quality" RCTs with Jadad score of five.
RESULTS: We identified 60 good quality RCTs using CAM as intervention for patients with rheumatic diseases: acupuncture (9), Ayurvedic treatment (3), homeopathic treatment (3), electricity (2), natural products (31), megavitamin therapies (8), chiropractic or osteopathic manipulation (3), and energy healing therapy (1). The studies do not seem to suggest a particular type of CAM is effective for all types for rheumatic diseases. However, some CAM interventions appear to be more effective for certain types of rheumatic diseases. Acupuncture appears to be beneficial for osteoarthritis but not rheumatoid arthritis. For the other therapeutic modalities, the evidence base either contains too few trials or contains trials with contradictory findings which preclude any definitive summary. There were only minor adverse reactions observed for CAM interventions presented.
CONCLUSION: We identified 60 good quality RCTs which were heterogenous in terms of interventions, disease, measures used to assess outcomes, and efficacy of CAM interventions. Evidence indicates that some CAM therapies may be useful for rheumatic diseases, such as acupuncture for osteoarthritis. Further research with larger sample size is required for more conclusive evidence regarding efficacy of CAM interventions.
OBJECTIVE:
We conducted a meta-analysis of RCTs to evaluate the effects of vitamin D supplementation in the prevention of symptom and structural progression of knee OA.
METHODS:
PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched to identify relevant studies. Outcomes included Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) pain, function, stiffness, tibial cartilage volume, and serum vitamin D3 levels, and adverse events. Results were expressed as weight mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI), and risk ratio (RR) with 95%CI.
RESULTS:
Four RCTs involving 1136 patients were included in this study. Pooled estimates suggested that vitamin D supplementation was associated with a significant reduction in WOMAC pain, and WOMAC function, but not in WOMAC stiffness. Vitamin D supplementation increased the serum vitamin D3 level, but had no effect on tibial cartilage volume. Subgroup analysis showed that, a daily supplement of more than 2000 IU vitamin D significantly decreased the WOMAC pain and WOMAC function. There was no significant difference in incidence of adverse events between the vitamin D and placebo groups.
CONCLUSION:
Vitamin D supplementation was effective in improving the WOMAC pain and function in patients with knee OA. However, it had no beneficial effect on the prevention of tibial cartilage loss. Therefore, there is currently a lack of evidence to support the use of vitamin D supplementation in preventing the progression of knee OA.
OBJECTIVE: To provide evidence regarding the effect of vitamin D supplementation on symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (OA).
METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to quantitatively pool the results from randomized clinical trials. Studies were identified from a search of the Embase, MEDLINE and Web of Science databases up to January 22, 2017, and also from conference abstracts, ClinicalTrials.gov and the reference lists of identified studies. A standardized mean difference (SMD) was used to assess effect sizes, as outcomes were reported on different scales. Depending on the degree of heterogeneity, random-effects or fixed-effects models were used to pool outcomes.
RESULTS: Up to January 22, 2017, four clinical trials containing 570 subjects in the vitamin D supplementation group and 560 subjects in the placebo group were identified. All of the included studies were of high quality and had a low risk of bias for each domain. The results indicated that vitamin D supplementation had a statistically significant but small-to-moderate effect on pain control in patients with knee OA (SMD=-0.32, 95% CI: -0.63 to -0.02). However, no effects were observed for the change in tibial cartilage volume (SMD=0.12, 95% CI: -0.05 to 0.29) or joint space width (SMD=0.07, 95% CI: -0.08 to 0.23). The subgroup analysis indicated that vitamin D supplementation had no significant effect regardless of whether patients had sufficient or insufficient serum 25(OH)D levels at baseline.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate that vitamin D supplementation may not have a clinically significant effect on pain control or structure progression among patients with knee OA. Longer-term clinical trials with rigorous measurement of symptom and radiologic changes are required to further clarify the effect of vitamin D supplementation in patients with symptomatic knee OA and low serum 25(OH)D levels.
CONTEXT: Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) provide evidence for a possible beneficial impact of vitamin D supplementation on health outcomes beyond bone health, but there are few reviews of noncalcemic adverse effects from long-term supplementation.
OBJECTIVE: The aims of this systematic review of vitamin D supplementation in RCTs were as follows: to determine whether all adverse effects, when combined, are reported equally between treatment arms; to identify the most common noncalcemic adverse effects reported; and to ascertain whether withdrawal rates, as a marker of clinical adverse effects, differ between treatment arms.
DATA SOURCES: The MEDLINE Ovid, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched systematically up to May 2016.
STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials that met the following criteria were selected: administered vitamin D2 or D3 supplements for a minimum supplementation or follow-up period of 24 weeks, had a placebo/control group, and were conducted among adults (≥ 18 y).
DATA EXTRACTION: Two researchers independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data, and carried out quality assessment of selected studies. A total of 128 studies with 52 297 participants were identified. A random-effects model was used to calculate risk ratios in a meta-analysis.
RESULTS: Long-term vitamin D2 or D3 supplementation, compared with placebo, did not increase all adverse effects, when combined, as reported in 62 studies with 19 389 participants (relative risk [RR] = 0.97; 95%CI, 0.92-1.02). Vitamin D also did not increase the risk of the most common noncalcemic adverse effects: gastrointestinal symptoms were reported in 27 studies with 9189 participants (RR = 1.01; 95%CI, 0.87-1.17), and dermatological symptoms were reported in 8 studies with 1695 participants (RR = 1.33; 95%CI, 0.82-2.15). Vitamin D did not increase withdrawals from 123 studies with 41 861 participants (RR = 1.03; 95%CI, 0.96-1.09). However, participants given vitamin D were more likely to report withdrawals than those given placebo in studies in which calcium was given in both arms (RR = 1.16; 95%CI, 1.02-1.33) when compared with participants in studies in which calcium was not given in either arm (RR = 1.00; 95%CI, 0.95-1.06; P for interaction = 0.009).
CONCLUSIONS: Overall, these findings suggest that vitamin D, by itself, does not increase the risk of noncalcemic adverse effects.
Existen pruebas contradictorias sobre la suplementación de vitamina D en la condición de la osteoartritis de rodilla. Esta revisión sistemática de la literatura se realizó para explorar los efectos de la suplementación con vitamina D en el manejo de la osteoartritis de rodilla. La búsqueda bibliográfica electrónica se realizó en bases de datos como PubMed ®, Embase ® y Cochrane CENTRAL desde el inicio hasta el 6 de julio de 2016. La calidad de los Ensayos Controlados Aleatorios (ECA) incluidos se evaluó mediante la herramienta Cochrane de riesgo de sesgo. Consideramos el cambio en el índice Western Ontario y en las universidades McMaster (WOMAC), la escala analógica visual (VAS) y la puntuación funcional del dolor (FPS) como la medida de resultado primaria. El cambio en el grosor del cartílago tibial, el ancho del espacio articular y el perfil de seguridad se consideraron resultados secundarios. Los participantes fueron asignados al azar a tratamiento o grupo placebo. Los participantes recibieron colecalciferol como una intervención por vía oral en el rango de dosis de 800-60.000 UI, excepto en el estudio en el que los participantes recibieron ergocalciferol. Todos los ECA incluidos mostraron un aumento significativo en el nivel sérico de vitamina D en el grupo de tratamiento en comparación con el grupo de placebo en el punto final. No se informó reducción significativa en el dolor y la función en la escala WOMAC excepto en un estudio. No se informó diferencia significativa para la rigidez WOMAC en ningún estudio. EVA se evaluó en tres estudios en los que dos mostraron una mejoría estadísticamente significativa en el dolor de rodilla. Tres de los ECA informaron datos de seguridad con una incidencia de cálculo ureteral y fractura de cadera encontrada relacionada con el fármaco. El estudio encontró pruebas de ECA como insuficientes para apoyar el uso de suplementos de vitamina D en pacientes con osteoartritis de rodilla.
The impact of vitamin D supplementation on cardiovascular outcomes and mortality risk reduction remains unclear due to conflicting study findings.
METHODS:
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), published between 1983 and 2022, that reported the effect of vitamin D supplementation in adults versus placebo or no treatment on all-cause mortality (ACM), cardiovascular mortality (CVM), non-cardiovascular mortality (non-CVM), and cardiovascular morbidities. Only studies with a follow-up period longer than one year were included. The primary outcomes were ACM and CVM. Secondary outcomes were non-CVM, myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, and major or extended adverse cardiovascular events. Subgroup analyses were performed according to low-, fair- and good-quality RCTs.
RESULTS:
Eighty RCTs were assessed, including 82,210 participants receiving vitamin D supplementation and 80,921 receiving placebo or no treatment. The participants' mean (SD) age was 66.1 (11.2) years, and 68.6% were female. Vitamin D supplementation was associated with a lower risk of ACM (OR: 0.95 [95%CI 0.91-0.99] p = 0.013), was close to statistical significance for a lower risk of non-CVM (OR: 0.94 [95%CI 0.87-1.00] p = 0.055), and was not statistically associated with a lower risk of any cardiovascular morbi-mortality outcome. Meta-analysis of low-quality RCTs showed no association with cardiovascular or non-cardiovascular morbi-mortality outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS:
The emerging results of our meta-analysis present evidence that vitamin D supplementation appears to decrease the risk of ACM (especially convincing in the fair- and good-quality RCTs), while not showing a decrease in the specific cardiovascular morbidity and mortality risk. Thus, we conclude that further research is warranted in this area, with well-planned and executed studies as the basis for more robust recommendations.
Pregunta de la revisión sistemática»Revisión sistemática de intervenciones
