{"id":6639,"date":"2024-11-29T23:22:54","date_gmt":"2024-11-29T19:22:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kardio.az\/?p=6639"},"modified":"2024-11-29T23:26:56","modified_gmt":"2024-11-29T19:26:56","slug":"guidelines-for-preventing-and-treating-vitamin-d-deficiency-vitamin-d-catismazligi-mualic%c9%99si","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/kardio.az\/de\/hekimler-ucun\/guidelines-for-preventing-and-treating-vitamin-d-deficiency-vitamin-d-catismazligi-mualic%c9%99si\/","title":{"rendered":"Guidelines for Preventing and Treating Vitamin D Deficiency ( Vitamin D \u00e7at\u0131\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131 m\u00fcalic\u0259si)"},"content":{"rendered":"<h1 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Vitamin D for the Prevention of Disease Guideline Resources<\/h1>\n\n\n\n<p><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><a href=\"https:\/\/academic.oup.com\/jcem\/advance-article\/doi\/10.1210\/clinem\/dgae290\/7685305?searchresult=1\">Vitamin D for the Prevention of Disease: An Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline<\/a><\/strong><strong><br><\/strong><em>JCEM<\/em>&nbsp;| August 2024 (online June 2024)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Marie B. Demay (Chair), Anastassios G. Pittas (Co-Chair), Daniel D. Bikle, Dima L. Diab, Mairead E. Kiely, Marise Lazaretti-Castro, Paul Lips, Deborah M. Mitchell, M. Hassan Murad, Shelley Powers, Sudhaker D. Rao, Robert Scragg, John A. Tayek, Amy M. Valent, Judith M. E. Walsh, Christopher R. McCartney<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The 2024 guideline on vitamin D for the prevention of disease:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Essential Points<\/strong> <\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Numerous studies demonstrate an association between serum concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) and a variety of common disorders including musculoskeletal, metabolic, cardiovascular, malignant, autoimmune, and infectious diseases. This has led to widespread supplementation with vitamin D supplementation and increased laboratory testing for 25(OH)D in the general population.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The benefit-risk ratio of this increase in vitamin D supplementation is not clear, and the optimal vitamin D intake and serum 25(OH)D concentrations for disease prevention remain uncertain.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>This guideline offers clinical guidelines for the use of vitamin D to lower the risk of disease in individuals without established indications for vitamin D treatment or 25(OH)D testing.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\"><img fetchpriority=\"high\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"800\" height=\"600\" src=\"https:\/\/kardio.az\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/Vitamin-D.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-6643\" srcset=\"https:\/\/kardio.az\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/Vitamin-D.png 800w, https:\/\/kardio.az\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/Vitamin-D-300x225.png 300w, https:\/\/kardio.az\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/Vitamin-D-768x576.png 768w, https:\/\/kardio.az\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/Vitamin-D-16x12.png 16w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>List of Recommendation<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Question 1.<\/strong> <strong>Should empiric vitamin D supplementation vs no empiric vitamin D supplementation be used for children and adolescents (ages 1-18 years)?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Recommendation 1<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In children and adolescents ages 1-18 years, we suggest empiric vitamin D supplementation to prevent nutritional rickets and potentially lower the risk of respiratory tract infections. (2 |&nbsp;\u2295\u2295OO)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Empiric vitamin D may include daily intake of fortified foods, vitamin formulations that contain vitamin D and\/or daily intake of a vitamin D supplement (pill or drops).<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>In the clinical trials included in the SR, with respect to respiratory tract infections in children, vitamin D doses ranged from 300 to 2000 IU (7.5 to 50&nbsp;\u03bcg) daily equivalent. The estimated weighted average was&nbsp;approximately&nbsp;1200 IU (30&nbsp;\u03bcg) per day.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Question 2. Should empiric vitamin D supplementation vs no empiric vitamin D supplementation be used for nonpregnant adults &lt;50 years of age?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Recommendation 2<\/strong><br>In the general adult population younger than age 50 years, we suggest against empiric vitamin D supplementation. (2 |&nbsp;\u2295\u25ef\u25ef\u25ef)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>This recommendation relates to empiric vitamin D supplementation that exceeds the DRIs established by the IOM. Adults in this age group should follow the Recommended Daily Allowance established by the IOM (600 IU [15 \u00b5g] daily).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Question 3.<\/strong> <strong>Should vitamin D supplementation vs no vitamin D supplementation be used for nonpregnant adults &lt;50 years of age only when 25(OH)D levels are below a threshold?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Recommendation 3<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In the general adult population younger than age 50 years, we suggest against routine 25(OH)D testing. (2 |&nbsp;\u2295OOO)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>In this population, 25(OH)D levels that provide outcome-specific benefits have not been established in clinical trials.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The panel suggests against (a) routine screening for a 25(OH)D level to guide decision-making (i.e., vitamin D vs no vitamin D) and (b) routine follow-up testing for 25(OH)D level to guide vitamin D dosing.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>This recommendation relates to generally healthy adults who do not otherwise have established indications for 25(OH)D testing (e.g., hypocalcemia).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Question 4. Should empiric vitamin D supplementation vs no empiric vitamin D supplementation be used for adults aged 50-74 years?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Recommendation 4<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In the general population ages&nbsp;50 to 74 years, we suggest against routine vitamin D supplementation. (2 |&nbsp;\u2295\u2295\u2295O)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>This recommendation relates to empiric vitamin D supplementation that exceeds the DRIs established by the IOM. Adults in this age group should follow the Recommended Daily Allowance established by the IOM (600 IU [15 \u03bcg] daily for those aged 50 to 70 years; 800 IU [20 \u03bcg] daily for those older than 70 years).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Question 5. Should vitamin D supplementation vs no vitamin D supplementation be used for adults aged 50-74 years only when 25(OH)D levels are below a threshold?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Recommendation 5<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In the general population ages 50 to 74 years, we suggest against routine 25(OH)D&nbsp;testing. (2 |&nbsp;\u2295OOO)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>In this population, 25(OH)D levels that provide outcome-specific benefits have not been established in clinical trials.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The panel suggests against (a) routine screening for a 25(OH)D level to guide decision-making (i.e., vitamin D vs no vitamin D) and (b) routine follow-up testing for 25(OH)D level to guide vitamin D dosing.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>This recommendation relates to generally healthy adults who do not otherwise have established indications for 25(OH)D testing (e.g., hypocalcemia).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Question 6. Should empiric vitamin D supplementation vs no empiric vitamin D supplementation be used by adults ages &gt;75 years?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Recommendation 6<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In the general population ages&nbsp;75 years and older, we suggest empiric vitamin D supplementation because of the potential to lower the risk of mortality. (2 |&nbsp;\u2295\u2295\u2295O)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Empiric vitamin D may include daily intake of fortified foods, vitamin formulations that contain vitamin D and\/or daily intake of a vitamin D supplement.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>For empiric supplementation, daily, lower-dose vitamin D is preferred over non-daily, higher doses.&nbsp;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>In the clinical trials included in the SR&nbsp;that reported on the mortality outcome, vitamin D dose ranged from 400 to 3333 IU [10 to 83&nbsp;\u03bcg] daily equivalent. The estimated weighted average was average was approximately 900 IU (23 \u03bcg) daily.&nbsp;Participants in many trials were allowed to remain on their routine supplements, including up to 800 IU (20 \u03bcg) of vitamin D daily.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Question 7. Should vitamin D supplementation vs no vitamin D supplementation be used by adults ages &gt;75 years only when 25(OH)D levels are below a threshold?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Recommendation 7<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In the general population ages 75 years and older, we suggest against routine testing for 25(OH)D levels. (2 |&nbsp;\u2295OOO)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>In this population, 25(OH)D thresholds that provide outcome-specific benefits have not been established in clinical trials.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The panel suggests against (a) routine screening for a 25(OH)D level to guide decision-making (i.e., vitamin D vs no vitamin D) and (b) routine follow-up testing for 25(OH)D level to guide vitamin D dosing.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>This recommendation relates to generally healthy adults who do not otherwise have established indications for 25(OH)D testing (e.g., hypocalcemia).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Question 8. Should empiric vitamin D supplementation vs no empiric vitamin D supplementation be used during pregnancy?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Recommendation 8<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>We suggest empiric vitamin D supplementation during pregnancy, given its potential to lower risk of preeclampsia, intra-uterine mortality, preterm birth,&nbsp;small for gestational age&nbsp;birth, and&nbsp;neonatal mortality.&nbsp;(2 |&nbsp;\u2295\u2295OO)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>This recommendation is based on evidence from trials conducted in healthy individuals during pregnancy.&nbsp;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Empiric vitamin D may include daily intake of fortified foods, prenatal vitamin formulations that contain vitamin D, and\/or a vitamin D supplement (pills or drops).<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>In the clinical trials included in the SR, the vitamin D doses ranged from 600 to 5000 IU (15 -125 \u03bcg) daily equivalent, usually provided daily or weekly.&nbsp;The estimated weighted average was approximately 2500 IU (63&nbsp;\u03bcg) per day.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Question 9. Should vitamin D supplementation vs no vitamin D supplementation be used during pregnancy only when 25(OH)D levels are below a threshold?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Recommendation 9<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>During pregnancy, we suggest against routine 25(OH)D testing. (2 |&nbsp;\u2295OOO)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>In this population, 25(OH)D levels that provide pregnancy outcome-specific benefits have not been established in clinical trials.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The panel suggests against (a) routine screening for a 25(OH)D level to guide decision-making (ie, vitamin D vs no vitamin D) and (b) routine follow-up testing for 25(OH)D level to guide vitamin D dosing.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>This recommendation relates to generally healthy pregnant individuals who do not otherwise have established indications for 25(OH)D testing (e.g., hypocalcemia).&nbsp;<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Question 10. Should empiric vitamin D supplementation vs no empiric vitamin D supplementation be used for adults with prediabetes (by glycemic criteria)?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Recommendation 10<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>For adults with high-risk prediabetes, in addition to lifestyle modification, we suggest empiric vitamin D supplementation to reduce the risk of progression to diabetes. (2 |&nbsp;\u2295\u2295\u2295O)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Lifestyle modification must be a routine management component for adults with prediabetes.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The clinical trials informing this recommendation primarily related to adults with high-risk prediabetes, identified as meeting two or three American Diabetes Association glycemia criteria (fasting glucose, HbA1c, 2-hour glucose after a 75-gram oral glucose challenge) for prediabetes and those with impaired glucose tolerance.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>In the clinical trials included in the SR, the vitamin D doses ranged from 842 to 7543 IU (21 to 189&nbsp;\u03bcg)&nbsp;daily equivalent. The estimated weighted average was approximately 3500 IU (88&nbsp;\u03bcg) per day. Participants in some trials were allowed to remain on their routine supplements, including up to 1000 IU (25 \u03bcg) of vitamin D daily.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Question 11. Should a daily, lower-dose vitamin D vs. non-daily (i.e., intermittent), higher-dose vitamin D be used for nonpregnant people for whom vitamin D treatment is indicated?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Recommendation 11<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In adults ages 50 years and older who have indications for vitamin D supplementation or treatment, we suggest daily, lower-dose vitamin D instead of non-daily, higher-dose vitamin D. (2 |&nbsp;\u2295\u2295OO)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The panel did not identify evidence related to individuals younger than age 50 years.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Question 12. Should screening with a 25(OH)D test (with vitamin D supplementation\/treatment only if below a threshold) vs no screening with a 25(OH)D test be used for healthy adults?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Recommendation 12<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In healthy adults, we suggest against routine screening for 25(OH)D levels. (2 |&nbsp;\u2295OOO)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>In healthy adults, 25(OH)D levels that provide outcome-specific benefits have not been established in clinical trials.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>This recommendation relates to adults who do not otherwise have established indications for testing with 25(OH)D levels (e.g., hypocalcemia).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Question 13. Should screening with a 25(OH)D test (with vitamin D supplementation\/treatment only if below a threshold) vs no screening with a 25(OH)D test be used for adults with dark complexion?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Recommendation 13<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In adults with dark complexion, we suggest against routine screening for 25(OH)D levels. (2 |&nbsp;\u2295OOO)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>This recommendation relates to generally healthy adults with dark complexion who do not otherwise have established indications for 25(OH)D testing (e.g., hypocalcemia).<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The panel did not identify any clinical trials that related clinical outcomes to skin complexion per se. A secondary analysis did not clearly suggest net benefit with vitamin D in those who self-identify as Black. The panel recognized that self-identified race is an inaccurate and otherwise problematic proxy for dark complexion.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Question 14. Should screening with a 25(OH)D test (with vitamin D supplementation\/treatment only if below a threshold) vs no screening with a 25(OH)D test be used for adults with obesity?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Recommendation 14<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In adults with obesity, we suggest against routine screening for 25(OH)D levels. (2 |&nbsp;\u2295OOO)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>In adults with obesity, 25(OH)D thresholds that provide outcome-specific benefits have not been established in clinical trials.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>This recommendation relates to&nbsp;generally healthy&nbsp;adults with obesity who do not otherwise have established indications for 25(OH)D testing (e.g., hypocalcemia).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.endocrine.org\/clinical-practice-guidelines\/vitamin-d-for-prevention-of-disease\">https:\/\/www.endocrine.org\/clinical-practice-guidelines\/vitamin-d-for-prevention-of-disease<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.panmerseyapc.nhs.uk\/media\/2146\/vitamind_adult.pdf\">https:\/\/www.panmerseyapc.nhs.uk\/media\/2146\/vitamind_adult.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/articles\/PMC9920487\">https:\/\/pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/articles\/PMC9920487<\/a><\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Vitamin D for the Prevention of Disease Guideline Resources Vitamin D for the Prevention of Disease: An Endocrine Society Clinical Practice GuidelineJCEM&nbsp;| August 2024 (online June 2024) Marie B. Demay (Chair), Anastassios G. Pittas (Co-Chair), Daniel D. Bikle, Dima L. Diab, Mairead E. Kiely, Marise Lazaretti-Castro, Paul Lips, Deborah M. Mitchell, M. Hassan Murad, Shelley&#8230;<\/p>","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":6641,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[26],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6639","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hekimler-ucun"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/kardio.az\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6639","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/kardio.az\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/kardio.az\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kardio.az\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kardio.az\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6639"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/kardio.az\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6639\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6644,"href":"https:\/\/kardio.az\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6639\/revisions\/6644"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kardio.az\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/6641"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/kardio.az\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6639"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kardio.az\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6639"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kardio.az\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6639"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}