Effects of vitamin D supplementation on blood markers in ulcerative colitis patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective Observational studies have shown that vitamin D levels are inversely related to ulcerative colitis activity, yet evidence from population interventions remains inconsistent. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials to clarify the effect of vitamin D on blood markers in patients with ulcerative colitis. Methods The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, VIP, and Wanfang databases were searched for studies published before June 2020. Information was collected regarding serum vitamin D levels, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and C-reactive protein (CRP), and Ca (calcium), and parathyroid hormone (PTH), and ulcerative colitis disease activity index (UCDAI) research data. Results Seven studies (n = 539) were included in the meta-analysis. Vitamin D supplementation resulted in significant improvements in the serum vitamin D levels (standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.69, 95% CI (0.36, 1.03), P < 0.001), ESR (weighted mean difference (WMD) = - 1.10, 95% CI (- 1.97, - 0.24), P = 0.01), CRP (SMD = - 0.43, 95% CI (- 0.67, - 0.20), P = 0.0003), and Ca (SMD = 0.92, 95% CI (0.09, 1.74), P = 0.03) but not in other outcomes. According to subgroup analysis, supplementation with vitamin D at a dose of >= 300,000 IU/day can improve serum vitamin D levels. Supplementation with a sufficient dose of vitamin D in a short period of time can also improve serum vitamin D levels. According to GRADE method evaluation, the evidence quality was classified as low for the Serum Vitamin D Level and ESR, and very low for the CRP, PTH, Ca, and UCDAI. Conclusions Compared with placebo control interventions, vitamin D supplementation seemed to be an effective intervention for patients with ulcerative colitis. Different doses of vitamin D and durations of intervention produce different effects. However, due to the limitation of the quality of the included studies, the above conclusions still need to be verified by more high-quality studies and weak clinical recommendations.