Background and aims: An increasing attention to the effect of vitamin D supplementation on cardiometabolic risk markers in children and adolescents has been gained recently. However, the results are inconsistent. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to examine the effect of vitamin D supplementation on cardiometabolic risk markers in children and adolescents. Methods and results: Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified by searching PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science. The results of this study are synthetized and reported in accordance with the PRISMA statement. GRADE system was used to assess the certainty of evidence. A total of 9 RCTs were identified and included in the meta-analysis. We found that vitamin D supplementation did not affect the changes of cardiometabolic risk markers including high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), triglycerides (TG), body mass index (BMI), waist circumferences, systolic blood pressure (SDP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP). However, vitamin D supplementation showed a beneficial effect on fasting glucose (MD, À1.54 mg/dl, 95% CI -2.98 to À0.10) and TG (MD, À24.76 mg/dl, 95% CI -37.66 to À11.86) in the sub-group analysis of total vitamin D supplementation ! 200,000 IU. Conclusions: Vitamin D supplementation appeared to have a beneficial effect on reducing fasting glucose and TG level when total vitamin D supplementation !200,000 IU but not HDL-C, LDL-C TC, blood pressure and waist circumferences levels in children and adolescents. Further studies are needed to address this issue.
BACKGROUND:The Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) uses anatomical and physiologic variables to predict mortality. Elderly (65 years or older) trauma patients have increased mortality and morbidity for a given TRISS, in part because of functional status and comorbidities. These factors are incorporated into the American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA-PS) and National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Surgical Risk Calculator (NSQIP-SRC). We hypothesized scoring tools using comorbidities and functional status to be superior at predicting mortality, hospital length of stay (LOS), and complications in elderly trauma patients undergoing operation.
METHODS:Four level I trauma centers prospectively collected data on elderly trauma patients undergoing surgery within 24 hours of admission. Using logistic regression, five scoring models were compared: ASA-PS, NSQIP-SRC, TRISS, TRISS-ASA-PS, and TRISS-NSQIP-SRC.Brier scores and area under the receiver operator characteristics curve were calculated to compare mortality prediction. Adjusted R 2 and root mean squared error were used to compare LOS and predictive ability for number of complications.
RESULTS:From 122 subjects, 9 (7.4%) died, and the average LOS was 12.9 days (range, 1-110 days). National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Surgical Risk Calculator was superior to ASA-PS and TRISS at predicting mortality (area under the receiver operator characteristics curve, 0.978 vs. 0.768 vs. 0.903; p = 0.007). Furthermore, NSQIP-SRC was more accurate predicting LOS (R 2 , 25.9% vs. 13.3% vs. 20.5%) and complications (R 2 , 34.0% vs. 22.6% vs. 29.4%) compared with TRISS and ASA-PS. Adding TRISS to NSQIP-SRC improved predictive ability compared with NSQIP-SRC alone for complications (R 2 , 35.5% vs. 34.0%; p = 0.046). However, adding ASA-PS or TRISS to NSQIP-SRC did not improve the predictive ability for mortality or LOS.
CONCLUSION:The NSQIP-SRC, which includes comorbidities and functional status, had superior ability to predict mortality, LOS, and complications compared with TRISS alone in elderly trauma patients undergoing surgery.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.