Post Number: 263
|Posted on Tuesday, March 20, 2012 - 12:56 pm: ||
There's different forms and tests of Vit D. Which is the most relevant to a transplantee?
I took a 1,25 test but read later that result might not be very meaningful.
|Received kidney Mar 16, 2011, from my brother! 3/6 match |
St. Joe's, Hamilton, ON
Peritoneal dialysis Nov '08 - Mar '11
Dx 1995 - believed to be chronic glomerulonephritis
Started CAPD Oct 2008
Post Number: 231
|Posted on Tuesday, March 20, 2012 - 02:23 pm: ||
My understanding (which may be wrong of course!) is that the 0,25 is the one that should be tested .. but actually the 1,25 is the important one in terms of effects
While this might sound odd, my vague understanding of the explanation is that in transplantees particularly the 0,25 is the only which which has a true value .. but I don't know what it is about transplantees that messes up a 1,25 test. Also, to make things worse, I understand that the 0,25 test isn't a good indicator of the true 1,25 level in transplantees - but it's the best we have.
I know this sounds vague but it was all the notes I managed to make at my clinic when they explained it to me.
What I do know is that I have my 0,25 measured by both my neph team and my family doctor team and the range 50-75 recommends that supplementation should be considered while the range >75 is considered optimal.
I am also pretty sure that the only sensible forms of vit-d to take (for supplementation purposes) are sunlight or native form vitd (ie vit-d2 or vit-d3). I was told it is best to avoid prescribed or otc vitd supplements if they also include calcium carbonate or vitamin A and that sterols etc like alfacalcidol increase the risk of calcification versus taking native vitD.
My neph has a sub-speciality in renal stones (incl calcification) so I'm pretty confident that this last bit is correct (about the exact form of the vit D supplement to take)
Not sure how much help this is but hope it's some