Vitamin D deficiency and severity of non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis: a systematic review
Rattachement africain : gr. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
INTRODUCTION: Vitamin D deficiency is common in cystic fibrosis (CF) and may be linked to disease severity. We aimed to investigate the association between vitamin D deficiency and severity in non-CF bronchiectasis. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed and Scopus (up to December 2024) identified relevant studies. After screening 170 articles, seven met the inclusion criteria. Study quality was assessed using NIH tools. RESULTS: Patients with non-CF bronchiectasis had significantly lower serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD) levels compared to healthy controls. In one study, median 25OHD was 24.7 nmol/L in patients vs. 45.3 nmol/L in controls. Another reported mean levels of 14.7 ± 9.6 ng/mL vs. 19.8 ± 6.9 ng/mL, respectively. Disease severity was assessed using validated and semi-structured measures, including the bronchiectasis severity index (BSI), number of exacerbations, pulmonary function tests (PFTs), radiological scores (Bhalla, modified Reiff), and health-related quality-of-life (HRQL) tools. Most studies reported worse severity outcomes in vitamin D-deficient patients. CONCLUSIONS: Although vitamin D deficiency appears to be associated with more severe non-CF bronchiectasis, heterogeneity between studies limits definitive conclusions. Future studies should incorporate standardized tools such as the eFACED score to better characterize disease severity.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Vitamin D deficiency and severity of non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis: a systematic review
- Date Crossref
- 20/07/2025
- Éditeur
- Informa UK Limited
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.