{"title":"Vitamin D and Bone Health 2022: Is the Evidence Pendulum Switching Backward on Its Benefits?","authors":"H. Saadi","doi":"10.1055/s-0043-1763273","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Objectives: This concise article aims to (a) review the role of vitamin D in bone health, (b) discuss the consequences of vitamin D deficiency, (c) analyze the use of vitamin D to prevent and treat osteoporosis and (d) explore if the evidence pendulum is switching back on the beneficial effects of vitamin D. Materials and Methods: A narrative nonsystematic review of the literature was done thematically to answer the questions stated in the objectives above. Results: A literature review suggests that vitamin D deficiency can be a real clinical condition that warrants recognition and management, particularly in high-risk groups. The optimal vitamin D level is likely more than or equal to 50 nmol/L (20 ng/mL). The established consequences of vitamin D deficiency in adults include osteomalacia and osteoporosis. Moreover, whether vitamin D supplementation reduces falls and fractures in subjects with baseline vitamin D more than 50 nmol/L (20 ng/mL) is not confirmed. However, vitamin D supplementation is still needed for patients with osteoporosis and those at increased risk of vitamin D deficiency. Finally, there is no justification for measuring 25-hydroxyvitamin D in the general population. Conclusions: For patients at increased risk for osteoporosis, those with vitamin D deficiency, or both, it remains reasonable to consider vitamin D supplementation (800–1,000 IU/d or more), consistent with recommendations of multiple societies.","PeriodicalId":294186,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Diabetes and Endocrine Practice","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Diabetes and Endocrine Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1763273","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract Objectives: This concise article aims to (a) review the role of vitamin D in bone health, (b) discuss the consequences of vitamin D deficiency, (c) analyze the use of vitamin D to prevent and treat osteoporosis and (d) explore if the evidence pendulum is switching back on the beneficial effects of vitamin D. Materials and Methods: A narrative nonsystematic review of the literature was done thematically to answer the questions stated in the objectives above. Results: A literature review suggests that vitamin D deficiency can be a real clinical condition that warrants recognition and management, particularly in high-risk groups. The optimal vitamin D level is likely more than or equal to 50 nmol/L (20 ng/mL). The established consequences of vitamin D deficiency in adults include osteomalacia and osteoporosis. Moreover, whether vitamin D supplementation reduces falls and fractures in subjects with baseline vitamin D more than 50 nmol/L (20 ng/mL) is not confirmed. However, vitamin D supplementation is still needed for patients with osteoporosis and those at increased risk of vitamin D deficiency. Finally, there is no justification for measuring 25-hydroxyvitamin D in the general population. Conclusions: For patients at increased risk for osteoporosis, those with vitamin D deficiency, or both, it remains reasonable to consider vitamin D supplementation (800–1,000 IU/d or more), consistent with recommendations of multiple societies.