Correlation of low serum vitamin-D with uterine leiomyoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract Background There is a growing body of evidence on low serum vitamin-D levels and the risk of uterine leiomyomas (UL). Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to investigate the association between serum vitamin D levels and UL occurrence. Methods Searches were syst...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Reproductive biology and endocrinology 2020-08, Vol.18 (1), p.1-85, Article 85
Main Authors: Mohammadi, Ramin, Tabrizi, Reza, Hessami, Kamran, Ashari, Hoda, Nowrouzi-Sohrabi, Peyman, Hosseini-Bensenjan, Mahnaz, Asadi, Nasrin
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Analysis
Fibroids
Leiomyoma
Meta-analysis
Pathogenesis
Quality
Review
Studies
Systematic review
Uterine fibroid
Uterine leiomyoma
Uterus
Vitamin D
Vitamin deficiency
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Abstract Background There is a growing body of evidence on low serum vitamin-D levels and the risk of uterine leiomyomas (UL). Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to investigate the association between serum vitamin D levels and UL occurrence. Methods Searches were systematically conducted of the electronic databases PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science (ISI), Cochrane library, Ovid, and Google Scholar to identify relevant studies from inception until February 6, 2020. Heterogeneity across the included studies was examined using Cochran’s Q and I-square (I 2 ). Data was pooled using random effects modeling and expressed as standardized mean differences (SMDs). Results Nine eligible studies with a total of 1730 participants (835 patients with UL and 895 controls) were included in the current meta-analysis. Pooled results with random effects modeling indicated that serum vitamin D levels were significantly lower in patients with UL than in the control group ( n  = 9, SMD = − 0.67; 95% CI, − 0.98, − 0.35, p  
ISSN:1477-7827
1477-7827
DOI:10.1186/s12958-020-00644-6