Publications by authors named "Wan Norlina Wan Azman"

3 Publications

  • Page 1 of 1

Comparison of Vitamin D Levels, Bone Metabolic Marker Levels, and Bone Mineral Density among Patients with Thyroid Disease: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Diagnostics (Basel) 2020 Dec 11;10(12). Epub 2020 Dec 11.

Endocrine Unit, Department of Medicine, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia Health Campus, Kubang Kerian 16150, Kelantan, Malaysia.

Thyroid hormones have a catabolic effect on bone homeostasis. Hence, this study aimed to evaluate serum vitamin D, calcium, and phosphate and bone marker levels and bone mineral density (BMD) among patients with different thyroid diseases. This cross-sectional study included patients with underlying thyroid diseases ( = 64, hyperthyroid; = 53 euthyroid; = 18, hypothyroid) and healthy controls ( = 64). BMD was assessed using z-score and left hip and lumbar bone density (g/cm). The results showed that the mean serum vitamin D Levels of all groups was low (<50 nmol/L). Thyroid patients had higher serum vitamin D levels than healthy controls. All groups had normal serum calcium and phosphate levels. The carboxy terminal collagen crosslink and procollagen type I N-terminal propeptide levels were high in hyperthyroid patients and low in hypothyroid patients. The z-score for hip and spine did not significantly differ between thyroid patients and control groups. The hip bone density was remarkably low in the hyperthyroid group. In conclusion, this study showed no correlation between serum 25(OH)D levels and thyroid diseases. The bone markers showed a difference between thyroid groups with no significant difference in BMD.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics10121075DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7763871PMC
December 2020

Global Prevalence of Macroprolactinemia among Patients with Hyperprolactinemia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020 11 6;17(21). Epub 2020 Nov 6.

Unit of Biostatistics and Research Methodology, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Health Campus, Kubang Kerian 16150, Kelantan, Malaysia.

Hyperprolactinemia (hPRL) often poses a diagnostic dilemma due to the presence of macroprolactin. Understanding the prevalence of macroprolactinemia (mPRL) has an important implication in managing patients with hPRL. The primary aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of mPRL globally and to explore selected factors influencing the prevalence estimate. Studies with original data related to the prevalence of mPRL among patients with hPRL from inception to March 2020 were identified, and a random effects meta-analysis was performed. Of the 3770 records identified, 67 eligible studies from 27 countries were included. The overall global prevalence estimate was 18.9% (95% CI: 15.8%, 22.1%) with a substantial statistical heterogeneity (I = 95.7%). The highest random effects pooled prevalence was observed in the African region (30.3%), followed by Region of the Americas (29.1%), European (17.5%), Eastern Mediterranean (13.9%), South-East Asian (12.7%), and Western Pacific Region (12.6%). Lower prevalence was observed in studies involving both sexes as compared to studies involving only female participants (17.1% vs. 25.4%) and in more recent studies (16.4%, 20.4%, and 26.5% in studies conducted after 2009, between 2000 and 2009, and before 2000, respectively). The prevalence estimate does not vary according to the age group of study participants, sample size, and types of polyethylene glycol (PEG) used for detection of macroprolactin (PEG 6000 or PEG 8000). With macroprolactin causing nearly one-fifth of hPRL cases, screening for mPRL should be made a routine before an investigation of other causes of hPRL.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17218199DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7664288PMC
November 2020

Hemolyzed Specimens: Major Challenge for Identifying and Rejecting Specimens in Clinical Laboratories.

Oman Med J 2019 Mar;34(2):94-98

Department of Chemical Pathology, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains, Kelantan, Malaysia.

Pre-analytical quality in clinical chemistry testing is as important as analytical and post-analytical quality. The most prevalent pre-analytical interference and a major source of error producing unreliable laboratory test results is hemolysis of blood samples. In vitro hemolysis may be due to the blood withdrawal technique or sample handling whereas in vivo hemolysis can originate from acquired, hereditary, or iatrogenic conditions and is not technique dependent. Interpreting in vivo or in vitro hemolysis requires clinicians to supply reliable clinical history and findings. Even then, to reject or release the result with interpretation is still under debate. Thus, hemolyzed specimens are a serious pre-analytical problem calling for well-designed and strictly implemented laboratory guidelines. The aim of this non-systematic review (addressed to healthcare professionals) was to highlight the challenges in identifying and rejecting hemolysis specimens.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.5001/omj.2019.19DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6425048PMC
March 2019
-->