Julie Huynh1, Thao Lu1, Danny Liew2,3, James Cg Doery4,5, Ronald Tudball4, Madeleine Jona1, Roisin Bhamjee1, Christine P Rodda1,6,7,8. 1. Women's and Children's Division, Sunshine Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 2. Melbourne Epicentre, University of Melbourne, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 3. Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 4. Monash Pathology, Monash Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 5. Department of Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 6. Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Sunshine Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 7. Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 8. Monash Medical Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Abstract
AIM: There are no published data to demonstrate the efficacy of bolus dose vitamin D in newborn infants. The study sought to evaluate this alternative approach of supplementation. METHODS: This single centre, open randomised controlled trial was conducted from August 2013 to May 2014. It compared the efficacy and safety of daily (400 IU) versus a bolus dose (50 000 IU) of cholecalciferol in newborn infants of vitamin D deficient mothers. The primary outcome measure was the rate of 25 hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD) repletion-defined as 25OHD greater than 50 nmol/L. The secondary objective was determining safety using adjusted total serum calcium. RESULTS: Of 70 eligible infants, 36 received a daily dose and 34 received asingle high-dose cholecalciferol. Mean 25OHD in the bolus group (154 nmol/L, 95% confidence interval (CI) 131-177) was higher than the daily group (48 nmol/L, 95% CI 42-54) at 1-2 weeks of age. This was reversed at 3-4 months, (65 nmol/L, 95% CI 59-71) compared with the daily group (81 nmol/L, 95% CI 77-85). More infants in the single bolus group achieved vitamin D repletion (100 vs. 31%) at 1-2 weeks. By 3-4 months, both groups achieved similar vitamin D repletion rates (91 vs. 89%). Mean adjusted total serum calcium in the bolus group were normal at 1-2 weeks (2.73 mmol/L) and 3-4 months (2.55 mmol/L). CONCLUSION: Single bolus dosing of 50 000 IU cholecalciferol achieves higher 25OHD repletion rates at 1-2 weeks of age compared with daily dosing, but repletion rates were similar by 3-4 months. There was no hypercalcaemia documented with single bolus dosing in this study.
RCT Entities:
AIM: There are no published data to demonstrate the efficacy of bolus dose vitamin D in newborn infants. The study sought to evaluate this alternative approach of supplementation. METHODS: This single centre, open randomised controlled trial was conducted from August 2013 to May 2014. It compared the efficacy and safety of daily (400 IU) versus a bolus dose (50 000 IU) of cholecalciferol in newborn infants of vitamin D deficient mothers. The primary outcome measure was the rate of 25 hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD) repletion-defined as 25OHD greater than 50 nmol/L. The secondary objective was determining safety using adjusted total serum calcium. RESULTS: Of 70 eligible infants, 36 received a daily dose and 34 received a single high-dose cholecalciferol. Mean 25OHD in the bolus group (154 nmol/L, 95% confidence interval (CI) 131-177) was higher than the daily group (48 nmol/L, 95% CI 42-54) at 1-2 weeks of age. This was reversed at 3-4 months, (65 nmol/L, 95% CI 59-71) compared with the daily group (81 nmol/L, 95% CI 77-85). More infants in the single bolus group achieved vitamin D repletion (100 vs. 31%) at 1-2 weeks. By 3-4 months, both groups achieved similar vitamin D repletion rates (91 vs. 89%). Mean adjusted total serum calcium in the bolus group were normal at 1-2 weeks (2.73 mmol/L) and 3-4 months (2.55 mmol/L). CONCLUSION: Single bolus dosing of 50 000 IU cholecalciferol achieves higher 25OHD repletion rates at 1-2 weeks of age compared with daily dosing, but repletion rates were similar by 3-4 months. There was no hypercalcaemia documented with single bolus dosing in this study.
Authors: Giuseppe Saggese; Francesco Vierucci; Flavia Prodam; Fabio Cardinale; Irene Cetin; Elena Chiappini; Gian Luigi De' Angelis; Maddalena Massari; Emanuele Miraglia Del Giudice; Michele Miraglia Del Giudice; Diego Peroni; Luigi Terracciano; Rino Agostiniani; Domenico Careddu; Daniele Giovanni Ghiglioni; Gianni Bona; Giuseppe Di Mauro; Giovanni Corsello Journal: Ital J Pediatr Date: 2018-05-08 Impact factor: 2.638
Authors: Karen M O'Callaghan; Mahgol Taghivand; Anna Zuchniak; Akpevwe Onoyovwi; Jill Korsiak; Michael Leung; Daniel E Roth Journal: Adv Nutr Date: 2020-01-01 Impact factor: 8.701
Authors: Antonio Corsello; Gregorio Paolo Milani; Maria Lorella Giannì; Valeria Dipasquale; Claudio Romano; Carlo Agostoni Journal: Healthcare (Basel) Date: 2022-06-01
Authors: Daniel E Roth; Steven A Abrams; John Aloia; Gilles Bergeron; Megan W Bourassa; Kenneth H Brown; Mona S Calvo; Kevin D Cashman; Gerald Combs; Luz María De-Regil; Maria Elena Jefferds; Kerry S Jones; Hallie Kapner; Adrian R Martineau; Lynnette M Neufeld; Rosemary L Schleicher; Tom D Thacher; Susan J Whiting Journal: Ann N Y Acad Sci Date: 2018-09-18 Impact factor: 5.691