4.5 Article

Three-year follow-up of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D, parathyroid hormone, and bone mineral density in nursing home residents who had received 12 months of daily bread fortification with 125 μg of vitamin D3

期刊

NUTRITION JOURNAL
卷 12, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/1475-2891-12-137

关键词

Geriatrics; Cholecalciferol; Osteoporosis; Vitamin D deficiency; Bread fortification

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: We conducted a single-arm clinical trial in institutionalized seniors, on the effects of high-dose vitamin D3-fortified bread daily intake (clinicaltrials. gov registration NCT00789503). Methods: At 1 and 3 years after the dietary fortification was stopped, serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH) D), parathyroid hormone (PTH) and bone mineral density were measured in 23 of the original study subjects, aged 60-82 years who had consumed bread buns (100 g) fortified with 320 mg elemental calcium and 125 mu g (5,000 IU) vitamin D3 daily for one year. Results: At the end of the 1-year supplementation phase (receiving vitamin D3 fortified bread daily), mean (SD) serum 25(OH) D was 127.3 +/- 37.8 nmol/L (baseline for this follow-up). At 1-year follow-up, the serum 25(OH) D was 64.9 +/- 24.8 nmol/L (p = 0.001, vs. baseline); and at 3-year follow-up it was 28.0 +/- 15.0 nmol/L (p = 0.001 vs. baseline). Serum PTH was 18.8 +/- 15.6 pg/ml at baseline while at Year 3 it was 48.4 +/- 18.4 pg/ml (p = 0.001 vs. baseline). Lumbar spine BMD did not change from baseline to Year 3. However, by Year 3, hip BMD had decreased (0.927 +/- 0.130 g/cm(2) vs. 0.907 +/- 0.121 g/cm(2), p= 0.024). Conclusion: Vitamin D nutritional status exhibits a long half-life in the body, and a true steady-state plateau may not even be reached 1 year after a discontinuation in dose. Furthermore, once the need for vitamin D has been established, based on a low baseline serum 25(OH) D concentrations, the appropriate action is to maintain corrective vitamin D supplementation over the long term.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据