Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for

  • Author or Editor: Sarah T. Menacho x
  • By Author: Brock, Andrea A. x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

Bob S. Carter and Fred G. Barker II

Restricted access

Michael Karsy, Jian Guan, Ilyas Eli, Andrea A. Brock, Sarah T. Menacho and Min S. Park

OBJECTIVE

Hypovitaminosis D is prevalent in neurocritical care patients, but the potential to improve patient outcome by replenishing vitamin D has not been investigated. This single-center, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized (1:1) clinical trial was designed to assess the effect on patient outcome of vitamin D supplementation in neurocritical care patients with hypovitaminosis D.

METHODS

From October 2016 until April 2018, emergently admitted neurocritical care patients with vitamin D deficiency (≤ 20 ng/ml) were randomized to receive vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol, 540,000 IU) (n = 134) or placebo (n = 133). Hospital length of stay (LOS) was the primary outcome; secondary outcomes included intensive care unit (ICU) LOS, repeat vitamin D levels, patient complications, and patient disposition. Exploratory analysis evaluated specific subgroups of patients by LOS, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score, and Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II).

RESULTS

Two-hundred seventy-four patients were randomized (intent-to-treat) and 267 were administered treatment within 48 hours of admission (as-treated; 61.2% of planned recruitment) and monitored. The mean age of as-treated patients was 54.0 ± 17.2 years (56.9% male, 77.2% white). After interim analysis suggested a low conditional power for outcome difference (predictive power 0.12), the trial was halted. For as-treated patients, no significant difference in hospital LOS (10.4 ± 14.5 days vs 9.1 ± 7.9 days, p = 0.4; mean difference 1.3, 95% CI −1.5 to 4.1) or ICU LOS (5.8 ± 7.5 days vs 5.4 ± 6.4 days, p = 0.4; mean difference 0.4, 95% CI −1.3 to 2.1) was seen between vitamin D3 and placebo groups, respectively. Vitamin D3 supplementation significantly improved repeat serum levels compared with placebo (20.8 ± 9.3 ng/ml vs 12.8 ± 4.8 ng/ml, p < 0.001) without adverse side effects. No subgroups were identified by exclusion of LOS outliers or segregation by GCS score, SAPS II, or severe vitamin D deficiency (≤ 10 ng/ml).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite studies showing that vitamin D can predict prognosis, supplementation in vitamin D–deficient neurocritical care patients did not result in appreciable improvement in outcomes and likely does not play a role in acute clinical recovery.

Clinical trial registration no.: NCT02881957 (clinicaltrials.gov)

Restricted access

Luis Rafael Moscote-Salazar, Alexis Rafael Narvaez-Rojas and Amit Agrawal