Vitamin D is a steroid hormone which is essential for the calcium and phosphorus metabolism as well as the musculoskeletal system health. 1 Of note, its deficiency is related to various diseases and adverse outcomes. 2 Vitamin D is acquired from sunlight exposure, diet and various supplements. Although inadequate synthesis and intake are the main causes of vitamin D deficiency; body composition also affects the circulating vitamin D levels. In this sense, especially adiposity has a negative effect on the vitamin D status. [3][4][5] In the pertinent literature, there are many studies that have investigated the relationship among vitamin D levels and obesity, fat mass and adiposity. 3-6 However, to our best notice, only one study seems to have examined the relationship between skinfold thickness and vitamin D levels. 7 Considering that a significant amount/ part of vitamin D is synthesised in the skin, it would not be unsound to speculate about an association between skin thickness and vitamin D levels. Accordingly, in this study, we aimed to explore the possible relationship among vitamin D levels, body composition (ie, skin, subcutaneous fat and muscle thickness) and functionality.
AbstractBackground: Vitamin D is a steroid hormone and it is essential for the musculoskeletal system health. The relationship among vitamin D levels and adiposity was shown.However, there is only one study seems to have examined the relationship between skinfold thickness and vitamin D levels.Methods: A total of 116 healthy subjects who had a recent vitamin D measurement were included. Skin, subcutaneous fat and muscle thicknesses were measured by ultrasound (US). Hand grip strength and usual gait speed were evaluated.Results: Subjects were classified into two groups according to 25-OH vitamin D levels. Skin thicknesses of anterior forearm in women and of anterior tibia in men, and trochanteric fat thicknesses of both genders were higher in lower 25-OH vitamin D group (both P < .05). There were no differences between the groups regarding muscle thicknesses, grip strength and gait speed (all P > .05). For identifying vitamin D deficiency (≤20 ng/mL); optimal skin thickness value was 1.25 mm in women (sensitivity: 91.3%, specificity: 54.7%), and optimal trochanteric fat thickness was 1.79 cm in men (sensitivity: 87.5%, specificity: 76.9). The specificity was increased to 79.2% if the cut-off value was taken as 1.35 mm for anterior forearm skin thickness in women.
Conclusion:We imply that skin thicknesses (anterior forearm and tibia) and subcutaneous fat (trochanteric region) increase in subjects with low vitamin D levels. Having also ascertained the relevant cut-off values, we underscore the possible role of these measurements as regards the assessment of vitamin D status.
R E FE R E N C E S