Association Between the Circulating Level of 25-Hydroxyvitamin D and Clinical Results After Cardiac Surgery: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Vitamin D (VitD) is an important pleiotropic hormone for organ systems. Studies have focused on the level of VitD, especially that of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25-(OH)-VitD), in patients after cardiac surgery and the relationship between VitD deficiency and adverse outcomes, but the results have been inconsistent. We carried out a meta-analysis to evaluate differences in the 25-(OH)-VitD level before and after cardiac surgery, and evaluated the predictive value of 25-(OH)-VitD level in the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Methods: Studies related to VitD level and cardiac surgery were searched from PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases from inception to October 2020. We applied the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale to assess the risk of a bias in individual studies. We examined the heterogeneity and publication bias and performed subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses. Results: Fifteen studies were included in our analysis. The 25-(OH)-VitD level was significantly lower immediately after surgery [stand mean difference (SMD), 0.69; 95%CI (0.1, 1.28), P = 0.023] and 24-h after surgery [0.84; (0.47, 1.21), 0.000] compared with that before surgery. A higher prevalence of 25-(OH)-VitD deficiency was recorded 24 h after surgery [RR, 0.59; 95%CI (0.47, 0.73), P = 0.00]. Pooled results demonstrated a significant relationship between the preoperative 25-(OH)-VitD level and vasoactive-inotropic score (VIS) [SMD, −3.71; 95%CI (−6.32, −1.10); P = 0.005], and patients with 25-(OH)-VitD deficiency revealed a comparatively poor prognosis and severe condition after cardiac surgery [−0.80; (−1.41, −0.19), 0.01]. However, 25-(OH)-VitD deficiency was not associated with the duration of stay in the intensive care unit. Conclusions: Cardiac surgery would leads to deficiency of 25-(OH)-VitD. And the preoperative and postoperative levels of 25-(OH)-VitD are associated with adverse events, which is eligible to work as an indicator to demonstrate clinical outcomes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.038 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".