Postoperative hypoparathyroidism is caused by manipulation or thermal injury of the parathyroid glands that become de-vascularizated, or from their inadvertent removal. Surgical experience and knowledge of cervical anatomy are crucial, however, there are other factors that could influence the development of hypoparathyroidism.
Many studies have tried to demonstrate the association between preoperative Vitamin D levels and development of postoperative hypoparathyroidism, but its role remains controversial.
Erbil et al determined in a 2009 study that preoperative vitamin D levels were lower in patients suffering from postoperative hypoparathyroidism. All patients with preoperative levels below 15 ng/mL suffered from hypoparathyroidism, compared to the 9.5% of patients with preoperative vitamin D levels above 15 ng/mL (8). Erbil et al group had published similar conclusions previously, showing that patients with preoperative vitamin D levels lower than 25 ng/mL have a 15-fold increased risk of developing postoperative hypoparathyroidism (9).
Kirkby-Bott et al also found differences between preoperative vitamin D levels, describing a hypoparathyroidism rate over 35% in patients with vitamin D <10 ng/mL, compared to a 15% rate in patients with levels over 20 ng/mL (10).
In the latest metanalysis published in 2021, eight studies analyzed preoperative vitamin D levels as a factor of postsurgical hypoparathyroidism. They reported a significantly higher incidence of transient hypocalcemia in patients with preoperative severe vitamin D deficiency (serum 25OHD levels < 10 ng/ml) and in patients with preoperative vitamin D deficiency (serum 25OHD levels < 20 ng/ml). Therefore, preoperative supplementation of oral vitamin D should be considered a way of minimizing hypocalcemia in these patients (11).
Manzini et al found that patients with severe preoperative vitamin D deficiency (serum 25OHD levels < 10 ng/ml) had a higher tendency to develop transient hypoparathyroidism, but without statistically significant differences, they also concluded that high preoperative vitamin D levels does not reduce the risk of permanent hypoparathyroidism (12).
On the other hand, other studies, have not found this association (13,14). Lang et al analyzed 281 patients who underwent total thyroidectomy and found an inverse relationship between preoperative vitamin D and postoperative PTH levels. Patients with preoperative vitamin D <10 ng/mL had higher PTH levels 24 hours after surgery, a lower percentage of PTH decrease at 24 hours and a lower rate of postoperative hypoparathyroidism than patients with vitamin D above 20 ng/mL (15). In our study, patients with transient hypoparathyroidism had significantly higher median preoperative vitamin D levels than patients without this complication. Furthermore, patients with vitamin D > 20 ng/mL presented a higher percentage of hypoparathyroidism the day after surgery (53.1% vs 31.4%; p=0.028) with a lower PTH at 24 hours and a higher percentage of PTH decrease than patients with vitamin D below 20 ng/mL, in line with the results of Lang et al.
Patients with vitamin D deficiency present secondary hyperparathyroidism, as a compensatory mechanism, and may associate hyperplasia of the parathyroid glands that expose them to greater risk during surgery (17).
Another possible hypothesis could be that the half-life of 25 (OH) vitamin D is approximately two weeks, higher than that of PTH, which is a few minutes; therefore, higher vitamin D levels inhibit the synthesis of PTH, so these patients could have less PTH synthesis during the immediate postoperative period (18). We did not find an association between vitamin D and the development of protracted or permanent hypoparathyroidism.
Even though this study is prospective, it does have its limitations. Patient recruitment was done in only one center. Patients were operated on by different surgeons of the Endocrine Surgery Unit of the General Surgery Department. The preoperative biochemical panel, which included vitamin D and PTH levels, was obtained from an isolated sample. The time elapsed between the preoperative measurements and the surgery, as well as their variations over time, could influence the results. The sample size is small, and some results could reach the statistical significance by increasing the sample size