Vitamin D during pregnancy: why observational studies suggest deficiency and interventional studies show no improvement in clinical outcomes? A narrative review
- 402 Downloads
A considerable number of studies have examined vitamin D status during pregnancy. Although data from observational studies denote vitamin D hypovitaminosis (deficiency or insufficiency) during pregnancy is associated with a plethora of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes, data from interventional (supplementation) trials fail to reveal a significant impact on maternal and offspring health. The aim of this narrative review was to critically appraise the methodology of the most representative published randomized controlled trials in an attempt to explain the difference between observational and supplementation results. We found that this difference could be attributed to a variety of factors, namely: (i) study design (lack of a specific outcome in conjunction with timing of supplementation, enrolment of participants with heterogeneous vitamin D status); (ii) pitfalls in the interpretation of vitamin D equilibrium (lack of determination of plasma half-life); (iii) supplementation regimen (administration of a wide range of regimens, in terms of dose, bolus and form); (iv) geographical characteristics (vitamin D needs could vary significantly within a country, particularly in areas with a wide range of latitude gradient); (v) adaptations of vitamin D metabolism during pregnancy (vitamin D and calcium equilibrium are changed during pregnancy compared with the non-pregnant state) and (vi) supplementation of populations with low baseline 25(OH)D values would likely manifest beneficial effects. All these parameters should be taken into consideration in the design of future vitamin D supplementation trials.
KeywordsVitamin D Randomized controlled trial Hypovitaminosis D Pregnancy
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
For this type of study formal consent is not required.
- 5.Berti C, Cetin I, Agostoni C, et al. (2014) Pregnancy and infants’ outcome: nutritional and metabolic implications. Crit Rev Food Sci NutrGoogle Scholar
- 22.Hossain N, Kanani FH, Ramzan S, Kausar R, Ayaz S, Khanani R, Pal L (2014) Obstetric and neonatal outcomes of maternal vitamin D supplementation: results of an open label randomized controlled trial of antenatal vitamin D supplementation in Pakistani women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 99:2448–2455CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 42.Wagner CL, Baggerly C, McDonnell SL, Baggerly L, Hamilton SA, Winkler J, Warner G, Rodriguez C, Shary JR, Smith PG, Hollis BW (2015) Post-hoc comparison of vitamin D status at three timepoints during pregnancy demonstrates lower risk of preterm birth with higher vitamin D closer to delivery. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 148:256–260CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 43.Holick M (2014) Sunlight, ultraviolet-radiation, vitamin D and skin cancer. How much sunlight do we need? In: Reichrath J (ed) Sunlight, Vitamin D and Skin Cancer, 2nd edn. Landes Bioscience and Springer Science, New York, pp 1–16Google Scholar
- 50.Xiang F et al (2013) High prevalence of vitamin D insufficiency in pregnant women working indoors and residing in Guiyang, China. J Endocrinol Investig 36:503–507Google Scholar
- 55.Karras SN, Anagnostis P, Paschou SA, Kandaraki E, Goulis DG. Vitamin D status during pregnancy: time for a more unified approach beyond borders? Eur J Clin Nutr. 2015Google Scholar
- 69.Karras SN, Petroczi A, Anagnostis P, Naughton DP (2015) Vitamin D epimer: a significant bio regulator or an inactive compound?. Osteoporos IntGoogle Scholar
- 70.Cannell JJ, Grant WB, Holick MF. Vitamin D and inflammation. Dermatoendocrinol. 2014; 6(1):e983401-1-10Google Scholar