4.4 Article

Evaluation of vitamin D levels in allergic fungal sinusitis, chronic rhinosinusitis, and chronic rhinosinusitis with polyposis

Journal

INTERNATIONAL FORUM OF ALLERGY & RHINOLOGY
Volume 6, Issue 2, Pages 185-190

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/alr.21585

Keywords

Chronic sinusitis; Vitamin D; Allergic fungal sinusitis; sinusitis with polypi; allergic rhinitis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BackgroundVitamin D-3 (VD3) levels have been recently found to be responsible for a number of immunological, anti-inflammatory and anti-infectious roles. Some studies reported that some forms of allergic fungal rhinosinusitis (AFRS), occurs more commonly in patients who are more susceptible to VD3 deficiency. The aim of this work was to measure VD3 levels in patients with AFRS and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). MethodsWe report a prospective case control study conducted at Ain Shams University. It included 74 participants divided into 4 groups: group A, 25 patients with AFRS; group B, 15 patients with CRS with nasal polyps (CRSwNP); group C: 15 patients with CRS without nasal polyps (CRSsNP); and group D, 19 controls. ResultsThere was a statistically significant (p < 0.001) difference of VD3 between groups A and B compared with groups C and D. There were no statistically significant differences between the 4 groups regard calcium levels. Finally, there was a statistically significant difference in phosphate levels when we compared groups A and B with groups C and D (p = 0.001). ConclusionSerum level of VD3 in patient with CRSwNP and AFRS is significantly lower than that of patients with CRSsNP and control subjects. Although these results do not imply a specific etiological or therapeutic relationship, VD3 levels may constitute an inexpensive prophylactic and cost-effective option in the therapeutic armamentarium in the control of AFRS and CRSwNP, either by itself or as a synergistic agent with traditional agents.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available