| Literature DB >> 29783717 |
Paige van der Pligt1, Jane Willcox2,3, Ewa A Szymlek-Gay4, Emily Murray5, Anthony Worsley6, Robin M Daly7.
Abstract
Pregnant women in Asia, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America are at risk of vitamin D deficiency (VDD) and prevalence throughout these regions are among the highest, globally. Maternal VDD has been associated with increased risk of a number of adverse maternal and neonatal health outcomes, yet research from developing countries is limited. We assessed the associations of maternal VDD during pregnancy with adverse health outcomes by synthesizing the literature from observational studies conducted in developing countries. Six electronic databases were searched for English-language studies published between 2000 and 2017. Thirteen studies from seven countries were included in the review. Prevalence of VDD ranged from 51.3% to 100%. Six studies assessed both maternal and neonatal outcomes, four studies assessed only maternal outcomes and three studies assessed only neonatal outcomes. Ten studies showed at least one significant association between VDD and adverse maternal and/or neonatal health outcomes including pre-eclampsia (n = 3), gestational diabetes mellitus (n = 1), postpartum depression (n = 1), emergency cesarean section delivery (n = 1), low birth weight babies (n = 4), small for gestational age (n = 2), stunting (n = 1). However most of these studies (n = 6) also showed no association with multiple health outcomes. Vitamin D assessment methods, criteria applied to define VDD, season and trimester in which studies were conducted varied considerably across studies. In conclusion, this study highlights the need to improve maternal vitamin D status in developing countries in an effort to support best maternal and child health outcomes across these regions. Future research should focus on more unified approaches to vitamin D assessment and preventative approaches that may be embedded into already existing antenatal care settings.Entities:
Keywords: developing countries; gestational diabetes mellitus; low birth weight; maternal; neonatal; obstetric; pre-eclampsia; pregnancy; small for gestational age; vitamin D
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29783717 PMCID: PMC5986519 DOI: 10.3390/nu10050640
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Figure 1Flow diagram of included studies.
Description of included studies.
| Study | Design | Recruitment | Sample | Serum Vitamin D Measurement | Criteria for Vitamin D Deficiency and Reported Prevalence | Outcomes | Risk Factors |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ajmani et al., 2016 India [ | Prospective cohort | Approached/screened: not reported | Age: mean 24.8 years | ELISA | Criteria *: | Maternal: 7.5% women diagnosed with pre-eclampsia, significant correlation between VDD and pre-eclampsia ( | Dark skin complexion, limited outdoor activity, low dairy intake, low fish intake ( |
| Ates et al., 2016 Turkey [ | Prospective cohort | Approached/screened: | Age: mean 29.5 years | LC-MS/MS | Criteria *: | Maternal: 53.8% women with severe VDD had vaginal delivery, compared with 32.7% as primary caesarean section ( | Covered dress, non-multivitamin use, winter ( |
| Aydogmus et al., 2014 Turkey [ | Prospective cohort | Approached/screened: | Age: mean 24.4 years | ELISA | Criteria *: | Maternal: 39.9% women with VDD had poor pregnancy outcomes compared with 23.2% of women without VDD ( | No significant associations |
| Chen et al., 2015 China [ | Prospective cohort | Approached/screened: | Age: mean 27.5 years | RIA | Criteria *: | Maternal: not assessed | Not assessed |
| Farrant et al., 2009 India [ | Prospective cohort | Approached/screened: | Age: mean 23.7 years | RIA | Criteria: | No correlation: VDD and GDM, | Autumn/winter ( |
| Gbadegesin et al., 2016 Nigeria [ | Prospective cohort | Approached/screened: not reported | Age: mean 31.3 years | HPLC | Criteria *: | No correlation: VDD and preeclampsia, SROM, anemia, GDM, preterm delivery, mode of delivery, Apgar score or stillbirth | No significant associations |
| Gur et al., 2014 Turkey [ | Prospective cohort | Approached/screened: | Age: mean 28.5 years | ELISA | Criteria *: | Maternal: 21.1%, 23.2% and 23.7% women had PPD at week 1, 6 and 6 months respectively; significant negative correlation (r = −0.2, −0.2, −0.3) between vitamin D levels and Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) score at each of the three time points; mean vitamin D level was significantly different between women with and without PPD at each of the three time points ( | Not assessed |
| Hossain et al., 2010 Pakistan [ | Cross-sectional | Approached: not reported (all women admitted to the labor suite for delivery during the study period were deemed eligible) | Age: mean 26.0 years | CI | Criteria *: | Maternal: compared with women in the highest tertile for vitamin D, women in the lowest tertile and mid-tertile were more likely to meet criteria for pre-eclampsia and gestational pre-hypertension (OR 2.28; 95% CI 0.35–23.28) and (OR 19.27; 95% CI 1.96–188.92 respectively); vitamin D levels were inversely correlated with maternal mean arterial pressure (r = 0.029) ( | Not assessed |
| Maghbooli et al., 2008 Iran [ | Cross-sectional | Approached/screened: not reported | Age: mean 27.4 years | RIA | Criteria: | Maternal: 52% women diagnosed with GDM, mean vitamin D significantly lower in women with GDM (16.49 ± 10.44 nmol/L) compared with non-GDM women (22.97 ± 18.25 nmol/L) ( | Not assessed |
| Pirdehghan et al., 2016 Iran [ | Cross-sectional | Approached/screened: not reported | Age: mean 26.7 years | ELISA | Criteria *: | Maternal: mean vitamin D significantly higher in natural or elective caesarean section women compared with abortion and emergency caesarean section women ( | No significant associations |
| Song et al., 2012 China [ | Cross-sectional | Approached/screened: not reported | Age: 29.9 (±0.3) years | ELISA | Criteria: | Maternal: not assessed | Not assessed |
| Toko et al., 2016 Kenya [ | Longitudinal | Approached/screened: | Age: mean 22.5 years | ELISA | Criteria: | Maternal: not assessed | Not assessed |
| Xin et al., 2017 China [ | Prospective cohort | Approached/screened: not reported | Age: mean 27.3 years | CI | Criteria: | Maternal: 1.2% pre-eclampsia, significant difference in incidence of severe pre-eclampsia in pregnant women with VDD (<50 nmol/L) ( | Age ≥ 35 years, pre-pregnancy BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2, nulliparity ( |
* Vitamin D unit of measurement converted from ng/mL to nmol/L. Abbreviations: VDD—vitamin D deficiency; BMI—Body Mass Index; CI—automated chemiluminescence immunoassay; ELISA—enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; GDM—gestational diabetes mellitus; LC-MS/MS—liquid chromatography tandem-mass spectrometer; LSCS—lower segment caesarean section; NICU—neonatal intensive care unit; OR—odds ratio; PPD—postpartum depression; RIA—radioimmunoassay; SGA—small for gestational age; PROM—premature rupture of membrane; SROM—spontaneous rupture of membranes.
Associations of VDD with reported maternal and neonatal outcomes across studies.
| Maternal Outcomes | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Study | PE | GDM | Anemia | GHTN | OHD | Mode of Delivery * | Cholestasis | PPO | PH | MMAP | PPD | PC | PROM/SROM |
| Ajmani et al. (2016) | + | - | - | ||||||||||
| Ates et al. (2016) | - | - | - | + | |||||||||
| Aydogmus et al. (2014) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | + | - | + | - | ||
| Chen et al. (2015) | |||||||||||||
| Farrant et al. (2009) | - | ||||||||||||
| Gbadegesin et al. (2016) | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||
| Gur et al. (2014) | + | ||||||||||||
| Hossain et al. (2010) | + | + | + | ||||||||||
| Maghbooli et al. (2008) | + | ||||||||||||
| Pirdehghan et al. (2016) | - | - | + | - | |||||||||
| Song et al. (2012) | |||||||||||||
| Toko et al. (2016) | |||||||||||||
| Xin et al. (2017) | + | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| Ajmani et al. (2016) | - | - | - | - | + | ||||||||
| Ates et al. (2016) | - | - | - | - | - | - | |||||||
| Aydogmus et al. (2014) | - | - | - | - | - | - | + | + | |||||
| Chen et al. (2015) | + | + | |||||||||||
| Farrant et al. (2009) | - | - | |||||||||||
| Gbadegesin et al. (2016) | - | - | - | ||||||||||
| Gur et al. (2014) | |||||||||||||
| Hossain et al. (2010) | |||||||||||||
| Maghbooli et al. (2008) | |||||||||||||
| Pirdehghan et al. (2016) | - | - | - | - | |||||||||
| Song et al. (2012) | - | + | + | ||||||||||
| Toko et al. (2016) | + | + | - | ||||||||||
| Xin et al. (2017) | |||||||||||||
Note that +: significant association between VDD and the outcome in question; -: no significant association. When neither + or - is given indicated that outcome was not assessed. VDD—vitamin D deficiency; PE—pre-eclampsia; GDM—gestational diabetes mellitus; GHTN—gestational hypertension; OHD—oligohydramnios; PROM—premature rupture of membrane; SROM—spontaneous rupture of membranes; IFD—Intrauterine Fetal Death; NICU—neonatal intensive care unit; HC—head circumference; CM—congenital malformation SGA—small for gestational age; PH—prolonged hospitalization; Macro—macrosomia; Post MB—post mature birth; MMAP—mean maternal arterial pressure; W z-score—wasting z score; PPO—poor pregnancy outcomes (grouped by study researchers); PPD—postpartum depression; PC—perinatal complications risk. * Grouped outcomes: Mode of Delivery (includes vaginal delivery and lower segment caesarean section), Birth weight (includes low birth weight), Congenital Malformation (includes Bony Abnormality), Stunted Growth (includes Impaired Fetal Growth), Still birth/IFD (includes mortality).
Summary of study quality assessment ratings for included studies.
| Study | Selection Bias | Study Design | Cofounders | Blinding | Data Collection Method | Withdrawals and Dropouts | Global Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ajmani et al. (2016) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | Weak |
| Ates et al. (2016) | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 1 | Weak |
| Aydogmus et al. (2015) | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 1 | Weak |
| Chen et al. (2015) | 1 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | Weak |
| Farrant et al. (2009) | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2 | Weak |
| Gbadegesin et al. (2016) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | Weak |
| Gur et al. (2014) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | Weak |
| Hossain et al. (2010) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | Weak |
| Maghbooli et al. (2008) | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | Weak |
| Pirdehghan et al. (2016) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 | Weak |
| Song et al. (2012) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | Weak |
| Toko et al. (2016) | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 3 | Weak |
| Xin et al. (2017) | 2 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | Weak |
1: Strong; 2: Moderate; 3: Weak.
Summary of global ratings for study quality.
| Quality Rating | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Quality Component | Strong ( | Moderate ( | Weak ( |
| Selection bias | 2/13 | 4/13 | 7/13 |
| Study design | 0/13 | 0/13 | 13/13 |
| Confounders | 3/13 | 0/13 | 10/13 |
| Blinding | 0/13 | 2/13 | 11/13 |
| Data collection methods | 13/13 | 0/13 | 0/13 |
| Withdrawal and dropout | 5/13 | 1/13 | 7/13 |
| Global rating | 0/13 | 0/13 | 13/13 |
1: Strong; 2: Moderate; 3: Weak. Global weak quality: two or more weak component ratings; moderate quality: less than four strong and one weak component ratings, high quality: four strong and no weak component ratings.