Obstetrics & gynecology science · 2020
Serum vitamin D levels and ovarian reserve markers in secondary amenorrhea patients: Is there a link?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kim Gyung-Mee, Jeon Gyun-Ho
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] level is associated with ovarian reserve markers in secondary amenorrhea (SA) patients.
METHODS: Sixty-three women diagnosed with SA were recruited during 12 months from the initiation of this prospective observational study. Serum 25(OH)D levels, serum anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels and antral follicle count (AFC) were estimated in study participants and ovarian reserve markers were compared between participants with vitamin D deficiency and those with normal vitamin D levels.
RESULTS: Of the 63 participants, 27 (42.9%) were vitamin D deficient (<20 ng/mL) and 36 (57.1%) had normal vitamin D levels. The mean AMH levels and AFC were 10.86±8.94 µ/L and 15.23±7.65 in the vitamin D deficient group, and 7.24±5.62 µ/L and 12.30±6.95 in the normal vitamin D group. Univariate and multivariate linear regression analysis of log10 transformed AMH and AFC with serum 25(OH)D adjusted for age and body mass index confirmed no association between vitamin D levels and AMH levels or AFC. There was also no correlation between serum 25(OH)D and AMH levels or AFC in all participants. However, participants with vitamin D deficiency had an increased chance of having polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) as cause of SA than those with normal vitamin D levels (adjusted odds ratio, 7.559; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-44.65; P=0.026) after adjustment for clinical factors by logistic regression model.
CONCLUSION: There was no correlation between serum 25(OH)D levels and ovarian reserve markers in SA patients, but vitamin D deficiency may be linked to PCOS patients.
METHODS: Sixty-three women diagnosed with SA were recruited during 12 months from the initiation of this prospective observational study. Serum 25(OH)D levels, serum anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels and antral follicle count (AFC) were estimated in study participants and ovarian reserve markers were compared between participants with vitamin D deficiency and those with normal vitamin D levels.
RESULTS: Of the 63 participants, 27 (42.9%) were vitamin D deficient (<20 ng/mL) and 36 (57.1%) had normal vitamin D levels. The mean AMH levels and AFC were 10.86±8.94 µ/L and 15.23±7.65 in the vitamin D deficient group, and 7.24±5.62 µ/L and 12.30±6.95 in the normal vitamin D group. Univariate and multivariate linear regression analysis of log10 transformed AMH and AFC with serum 25(OH)D adjusted for age and body mass index confirmed no association between vitamin D levels and AMH levels or AFC. There was also no correlation between serum 25(OH)D and AMH levels or AFC in all participants. However, participants with vitamin D deficiency had an increased chance of having polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) as cause of SA than those with normal vitamin D levels (adjusted odds ratio, 7.559; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-44.65; P=0.026) after adjustment for clinical factors by logistic regression model.
CONCLUSION: There was no correlation between serum 25(OH)D levels and ovarian reserve markers in SA patients, but vitamin D deficiency may be linked to PCOS patients.