4.4 Article

Correction of preoperative vitamin D deficiency after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery

期刊

SURGERY FOR OBESITY AND RELATED DISEASES
卷 3, 期 4, 页码 434-437

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.soard.2007.02.007

关键词

Vitamin D; Gastric bypass; Morbid obesity; Supplement

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: To evaluate the adequacy of supplementation to correct preoperative vitamin D deficiency in adult patients during the year after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) surgery. Methods: The medical records were reviewed and the preoperative and 12-month postoperative serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] levels were compared in patients who underwent RYGB front 2002 to 2004. The serum 25(OH)D levels were defined as being optimal (>= 80 nmol/L), suboptimal (50-79 nmol/L), or deficient (<50 nmol/L). Patients with deficient 25(OH)D levels were prescribed 50,000 IU ergocalciferol weekly. The remaining patients averaged 710 IU supplemental vitamin D intake daily. Results: The mean patient age was 43.8 +/- 10.7 years, and the mean preoperative body mass index was 51.8 +/- 9.8 km(2). Of the 95 patients with baseline and 12-month 25(OH)D levels, 89% were women, The mean preoperative 25(OH)D level was 49.7 +/- 26.5 nmol/L: 34% had suboptimal 25(OH)D levels and 54% had deficient levels before surgery. Twelve months after surgery, those receiving 50,000 IU weekly (n = 40) had a mean 25(OH)D level of 69.2 +/- 22.2 nmol/L; 63% had suboptimal and 8% deficient levels. Those taking 710 IU daily (n = 55) had a mean 25(OH)D level of 85.5 +/- 33.0 nmol/L; 44% had Suboptimal and 6% deficient levels. Conclusion: Vitamin D deficiency is prevalent in RYGB patients before surgery. The vitamin D status improved markedly after RYGB Surgery with either 710 IU vitamin D daily or 50,000 IU weekly. Current Supplementation practices do not appear to optimize the serum 25(OH)D levels and need to be more closely examined. (Sure Obes Relat Dis 2007;3:434-437.) (C) 2007 American Society for Bariatric Surgery. All rights reserved.

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

4.4
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