Home | About us | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current issue | Archives | Submit article | Instructions | Subscribe | Contacts | Advertise | Login 
Search Article 
Advanced search 
  Users Online: 377 Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size  
Year : 2017  |  Volume : 21  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 131-136

Effect of oral versus intramuscular Vitamin D replacement in apparently healthy adults with Vitamin D deficiency

1 Department of Endocrinology, Fortis Escorts Hospital, Amritsar, Punjab, India
2 Division of Endocrinology and Diabetes, Medanta the Medicity, Gurgaon, Haryana, India
3 Department of Endocrinology, Indraprastha Apollo Hospitals, New Delhi, India
4 Senior Consultant Endocrinology and Scientific Advisor (Projects), ILSI-India, New Delhi, India

Correspondence Address:
Khalid J Farooqui
Division of Endocrinology and Diabetes, Medanta the Medicity, Sector 38, Gurgaon - 122 001, Haryana
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/2230-8210.196007

Rights and Permissions

Context: A number of controversies exist regarding appropriate treatment strategy for Vitamin D deficiency. Aims: The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of equivalent doses of oral cholecalciferol (60,000 IU weekly for 5 weeks) versus intramuscular (IM) cholecalciferol (300,000 IU) in correcting Vitamin D deficiency in apparently healthy volunteers working in a hospital. Settings and Design: Prospective randomized open-label single institution study. Subjects and Methods: This study enrolled 40 apparently healthy adults with Vitamin D deficiency into 2 arms. The oral cholecalciferol group (n = 20) received oral cholecalciferol 60,000 IU weekly for 5 weeks while the IM cholecalciferol group (n = 20) received a single injection of cholecalciferol 300,000 IU. The main outcome measure was serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD) levels at baseline, 6 and 12 weeks after the intervention. Statistical Analysis Used: Differences in serum 25OHD and other biochemical parameters at baseline and follow-up were analyzed using general linear model. Results: Mean 25OHD level at baseline was 5.99 ± 1.07 ng/mL and 7.40 ± 1.13 ng/mL (P = 0.332) in the oral cholecalciferol and IM cholecalciferol group, respectively. In the oral cholecalciferol group, serum 25OHD level was 20.20 ± 1.65 ng/mL at 6 weeks and 16.66 ± 1.36 ng/mL at 12 weeks. The corresponding serum 25OHD levels in the IM cholecalciferol group were 20.74 ± 1.81 ng/mL and 25.46 ± 1.37 ng/mL at 6 and 12 weeks, respectively. At 12 weeks, the mean 25OHD levels in IM cholecalciferol group was higher as compared to the oral cholecalciferol group (25.46 ± 1.37 vs. 16.66 ± 1.36 ng/mL; P< 0.001). Conclusions: Both oral and IM routes are effective for the treatment of Vitamin D deficiency. 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels in the IM cholecalciferol group showed a sustained increase from baseline.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded242    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal