4.2 Article

Depressed Serum 25-Hydroxyvitamin D Levels Increase Hospital Stay and Alter Glucose Homeostasis in First-ever Ischemic Stroke

期刊

CURRENT NEUROVASCULAR RESEARCH
卷 16, 期 4, 页码 340-347

出版社

BENTHAM SCIENCE PUBL LTD
DOI: 10.2174/1567202616666190924161947

关键词

25-hydroxyvitamin D; first-ever ischemic stroke; hospital stay; functional outcome; mortality; vitamin D

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China [81870943]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and Objective: Vitamin D deficiency is internationally recognized among the potentially modifiable risk factors for ischemic cardio-cerebrovascular diseases. However, the association between vitamin D deficiency and stroke morbidity or mortality remains insufficiently known. Our aim is to investigate their relevance to 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH) D] levels and clinical severity and outcome after 3 months in first-ever ischemic stroke. Methods: Retrospective analysis of 356 consecutive patients in first-ever ischemic stroke between 2013 and 2015. Serum 25(OH) D levels were measured at baseline. Stroke severity was assessed at admission using the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score. Functional outcome after 3 months of onset was evaluated using the modified Rankin scale (mRS). Results: Among the 356 enrolled patients, HbA1c was higher in insufficiency/deficiency group than that in the sufficiency group (6.3 +/- 1.7 vs. 5.9 +/- 1.1, p =0.015). The hospital stay was longer in insufficiency/deficiency group than that in the sufficiency group (11 (8-17) vs. 9.5 (7-13), p = 0.035). There was a significant inversed trend between serum 25(OH) D levels and hospital stay (OR 0.960, P = 0.031), using logistic regression. Conclusion: 25(OH)D levels are associated with glucose homeostasis, 25(OH) D contributes to increase the length of hospital stay. Low serum 25-OHD level is an independent predictor for hospital stay in first-ever ischemic stroke. Vitamin D deficiency did not predict functional outcome in the span of 3 months.

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

4.2
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