-
Nutrients Aug 2017We summarize the 2016 update of the 2004 Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality's evidence review of omega-3 fatty acids and cardiovascular disease (CVD). The overall... (Review)
Review
We summarize the 2016 update of the 2004 Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality's evidence review of omega-3 fatty acids and cardiovascular disease (CVD). The overall findings for the effects of marine oil supplements on intermediate CVD outcomes remain largely unchanged. There is high strength of evidence, based on numerous trials, of no significant effects of marine oils on systolic or diastolic blood pressures, but there are small, yet statistically significant increases in high density lipoprotein and low density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations. The clinical significance of these small changes, particularly in combination, is unclear. The strongest effect of marine oils is on triglyceride concentrations. Across studies, this effect was dose-dependent and related to studies' mean baseline triglyceride concentration. In observational studies, there is low strength of evidence that increased marine oil intake lowers ischemic stroke risk. Among randomized controlled trials and observational studies, there is evidence of variable strength of no association with increased marine oil intake and lower CVD event risk. Evidence regarding alpha-linolenic acid intake is sparser. There is moderate strength of evidence of no effect on blood pressure or lipoprotein concentrations and low strength of evidence of no association with coronary heart disease, atrial fibrillation and congestive heart failure.
Topics: Cardiovascular Diseases; Dietary Supplements; Fatty Acids, Omega-3; Fish Oils; Humans; United States; United States Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
PubMed: 28800093
DOI: 10.3390/nu9080865 -
Medicine May 2017Polyunsaturated fats (PUFAs) have been shown to reduce type 2 diabetes (T2DM) risk and improve insulin responsiveness in T2DM subjects, but whether the plant sources of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The effect of alpha-linolenic acid on glycemic control in individuals with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials.
BACKGROUND
Polyunsaturated fats (PUFAs) have been shown to reduce type 2 diabetes (T2DM) risk and improve insulin responsiveness in T2DM subjects, but whether the plant sources of omega-3 PUFA (alpha-linolenic acid [ALA]) have an effect on glycemic control requires further investigation.
METHODS
The parameters of interest were glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting blood glucose (FBG), fasting blood insulin (FBI), homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), fructosamine, and glycated albumin. A comprehensive search was conducted with MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) ≥1 month in duration that compared diets enriched in ALA with usual diets on glycemic parameters. For each study, the risk of bias as well as the study quality was assessed. Using the statistical software RevMan (v5.3), data were pooled using the generic inverse method with random effects model, and final results were expressed as mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Heterogeneity was assessed by the Cochran Q statistic and quantified by the I statistic.
RESULTS
A total of 8 trials (N = 212) were included in the meta-analysis. Compared to a control diet, a median dose of 4.4 g/day of ALA intake for a median duration of 3 months did not affect HbA1c (%) (MD = -.01; [95%: -.32, .31], P = .96). A median ALA dose of 5.4 g/day did not lower FBG (MD = .07; [95% CI: -.61, .76], P = .84) or FBI (MD = 7.03, [95% CI: -5.84, 19.89], P = .28). Summary effect estimates were generally compromised by considerable and unexplained heterogeneity (I ≥75%). In the subgroup analysis of continuous predictors, a reduction in HbA1c (%) and FBG (mmol/L) was significantly associated with an increased intake of ALA. Further adjustment for Publication Bias using Duval and Tweedie's trim-and-fill analysis provided an adjusted, significant MD of -.25 (95% CI: -.38, -.12; P <.001) for HbA1c (%).
CONCLUSIONS
ALA-enriched diets did not affect HbA1c, FBG, or FBI. The scarce number of existing RCTs and the presence of heterogeneity in our meta-analysis limit the ability to make firm conclusions about ALA in T2DM management. The potential for ALA to have dose-dependent effects warrants further research in this area.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; alpha-Linolenic Acid
PubMed: 28538363
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000006531 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2017The long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (LCPUFA) docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and arachidonic acid (AA) are considered essential for maturation of the developing brain,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (LCPUFA) docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and arachidonic acid (AA) are considered essential for maturation of the developing brain, retina and other organs in newborn infants. Standard infant milk formulae are not supplemented with LCPUFA; they contain only alpha-linolenic acid and linoleic acid, from which formula-fed infants must synthesise their own DHA and AA, respectively. Over the past few years, some manufacturers have added LCPUFA to formula milk and have marketed these products as providing an advantage for the overall development of full-term infants.
OBJECTIVES
To assess whether supplementation of formula milk with LCPUFA is both safe and beneficial for full-term infants, while focusing on effects on visual function, neurodevelopment and physical growth.
SEARCH METHODS
Two review authors independently searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; December 2016), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1966 to December 2016), Embase (Ovid, 1980 to December 2016), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; 1980 to December 2016) and abstracts of the Pediatric Academic Societies (2000 to 2016). We applied no language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We reviewed all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating effects of LCPUFA supplemented versus non-supplemented formula milk on visual function, neurodevelopment and physical growth. We did not include trials reporting only biochemical outcomes.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors extracted data independently. We assessed risk of bias of included studies using the guidelines of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group. When appropriate, we conducted meta-analysis to determine a pooled estimate of effect.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 31 RCTs and included 15 of these in the review (N = 1889).Nine studies assessed visual acuity, six of which used visual evoked potentials (VEP), two Teller cards and one both. Four studies reported beneficial effects, and the remaining five did not. Meta-analysis of three RCTs showed significant benefit for sweep VEP acuity at 12 months (log of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR)) (mean difference (MD) -0.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.17 to -0.13; I = 0; three trials; N = 244), but meta-analysis of three other RCTs showed no benefit for visual acuity measured with Teller cards at 12 months (cycles/degree) (MD -0.01, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.11; I = 0; three trials; N = 256). GRADE analysis for the outcome of visual acuity indicated that the overall quality of evidence was low.Eleven studies measured neurodevelopmental outcomes at or before two years. Nine studies used Bayley Scales of Infant Development, version II (BSID-II), and only two of these studies reported beneficial effects. Meta-analysis revealed no significant differences between LCPUFA and placebo groups in BSID Mental Developmental Index (MDI) scores at 18 months (MD 0.06, 95% CI -2.01 to 2.14; I = 75%; four trials; N = 661) and no significant differences in BSID Psychomotor Development Index (PDI) scores at 18 months (MD 0.69, 95% CI -0.78 to 2.16; I = 61%; four trials; N = 661). Results showed no significant differences between the two groups in BSID-II scores at one year and two years of age. One study reported better novelty preference measured by the Fagan Infant Test at nine months. Another study reported better problem solving at 10 months. One study used the Brunet and Lezine test to assess the developmental quotient and found no beneficial effects. Follow-up of some infants in different studies at three, six and nine years of age revealed no beneficial effects of supplementation. GRADE analysis of these outcomes indicated that the overall quality of evidence was low.Thirteen studies measured physical growth; none found beneficial or harmful effects of supplementation. Meta-analysis of five RCTs showed that the supplemented group had lower weight (z scores) at one year of age (MD -0.23, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.06; I = 83%; N = 521) and that the two groups showed no significant differences with respect to length and head circumference (z scores). Meta-analysis at 18 months and at two years revealed no significant differences between the two groups with respect to weight (kg), length (cm) and head circumference (cm). GRADE analysis of these outcomes indicated that the overall quality of evidence was low.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Most of the included RCTs reported no beneficial effects or harms of LCPUFA supplementation on neurodevelopmental outcomes of formula-fed full-term infants and no consistent beneficial effects on visual acuity. Routine supplementation of full-term infant milk formula with LCPUFA cannot be recommended at this time.
Topics: Arachidonic Acid; Body Weight; Cephalometry; Child Development; Dietary Supplements; Docosahexaenoic Acids; Evoked Potentials, Visual; Fatty Acids, Unsaturated; Growth; Humans; Infant; Infant Formula; Infant Nutritional Physiological Phenomena; Infant, Newborn; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Term Birth; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 28281303
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000376.pub4 -
Annals of Nutrition & Metabolism 2017Earlier reviews indicated that in many countries adults, children and adolescents consume on an average less polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) than recommended by the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Earlier reviews indicated that in many countries adults, children and adolescents consume on an average less polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) than recommended by the Food and Agriculture Organisation/World Health Organisation.
SUMMARY
The intake of total and individual n-3 and n-6 PUFAs in European infants, children, adolescents, elderly and pregnant/lactating women was evaluated systematically.
RESULTS
The evaluations were done against recommendations of the European Food Safety Authority. Key Messages: Fifty-three studies from 17 different European countries reported an intake of total n-3 and n-6 PUFAs and/or individual n-3 or n-6 PUFAs in at least one of the specific population groups: 10 in pregnant women, 4 in lactating women, 3 in infants 6-12 months, 6 in children 1-3 years, 11 in children 4-9 years, 8 in adolescents 10-18 years and 11 in elderly >65 years. Mean linoleic acid intake was within the recommendation (4 energy percentage [E%]) in 52% of the countries, with inadequate intakes more likely in lactating women, adolescents and elderly. Mean α-linolenic acid intake was within the recommendation (0.5 E%) in 77% of the countries. In 26% of the countries, mean eicosapentaenoic acid and/or docosahexaenoic acid intake was as recommended. These results indicate that intake of n-3 and n-6 PUFAs may be suboptimal in specific population groups in Europe.
Topics: Adolescent; Aged; Child; Child, Preschool; Dietary Fats, Unsaturated; Europe; Fatty Acids, Omega-3; Fatty Acids, Omega-6; Female; Humans; Infant; Lactation; Male; Milk, Human; Nutrition Policy; Pregnancy
PubMed: 28190013
DOI: 10.1159/000456723 -
Nutrients Jan 2017Arthritis patients often take fish oil supplements to alleviate symptoms, but limited evidence exists regarding their efficacy. The objective was to evaluate whether... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Arthritis patients often take fish oil supplements to alleviate symptoms, but limited evidence exists regarding their efficacy. The objective was to evaluate whether marine oil supplements reduce pain and/or improve other clinical outcomes in patients with arthritis. Six databases were searched systematically (24 February 2015). We included randomized trials of oral supplements of all marine oils compared with a control in arthritis patients. The internal validity was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and heterogeneity was explored using restricted maximum of likelihood (REML)-based meta-regression analysis. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to rate the overall quality of the evidence. Forty-two trials were included; 30 trials reported complete data on pain. The standardized mean difference (SMD) suggested a favorable effect (-0.24; 95% confidence interval, CI, -0.42 to -0.07; heterogeneity, ² = 63%. A significant effect was found in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (22 trials; -0.21; 95% CI, -0.42 to -0.004) and other or mixed diagnoses (3 trials; -0.63; 95% CI, -1.20 to -0.06), but not in osteoarthritis patients (5 trials; -0.17; 95% CI, -0.57-0.24). The evidence for using marine oil to alleviate pain in arthritis patients was overall of low quality, but of moderate quality in rheumatoid arthritis patients.
Topics: Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Databases, Factual; Dietary Supplements; Docosahexaenoic Acids; Eicosapentaenoic Acid; Fish Oils; Humans; Inflammation; Osteoarthritis; Pain; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome; alpha-Linolenic Acid
PubMed: 28067815
DOI: 10.3390/nu9010042 -
The British Journal of Nutrition Mar 2016Demand for organic meat is partially driven by consumer perceptions that organic foods are more nutritious than non-organic foods. However, there have been no systematic... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
Demand for organic meat is partially driven by consumer perceptions that organic foods are more nutritious than non-organic foods. However, there have been no systematic reviews comparing specifically the nutrient content of organic and conventionally produced meat. In this study, we report results of a meta-analysis based on sixty-seven published studies comparing the composition of organic and non-organic meat products. For many nutritionally relevant compounds (e.g. minerals, antioxidants and most individual fatty acids (FA)), the evidence base was too weak for meaningful meta-analyses. However, significant differences in FA profiles were detected when data from all livestock species were pooled. Concentrations of SFA and MUFA were similar or slightly lower, respectively, in organic compared with conventional meat. Larger differences were detected for total PUFA and n-3 PUFA, which were an estimated 23 (95 % CI 11, 35) % and 47 (95 % CI 10, 84) % higher in organic meat, respectively. However, for these and many other composition parameters, for which meta-analyses found significant differences, heterogeneity was high, and this could be explained by differences between animal species/meat types. Evidence from controlled experimental studies indicates that the high grazing/forage-based diets prescribed under organic farming standards may be the main reason for differences in FA profiles. Further studies are required to enable meta-analyses for a wider range of parameters (e.g. antioxidant, vitamin and mineral concentrations) and to improve both precision and consistency of results for FA profiles for all species. Potential impacts of composition differences on human health are discussed.
Topics: Animal Husbandry; Animals; Diet; Evidence-Based Practice; Food, Organic; Humans; Livestock; Meat; Meat Products; Nutritive Value
PubMed: 26878675
DOI: 10.1017/S0007114515005073 -
The British Journal of Nutrition Mar 2016Demand for organic milk is partially driven by consumer perceptions that it is more nutritious. However, there is still considerable uncertainty over whether the use of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Higher PUFA and n-3 PUFA, conjugated linoleic acid, α-tocopherol and iron, but lower iodine and selenium concentrations in organic milk: a systematic literature review and meta- and redundancy analyses.
Demand for organic milk is partially driven by consumer perceptions that it is more nutritious. However, there is still considerable uncertainty over whether the use of organic production standards affects milk quality. Here we report results of meta-analyses based on 170 published studies comparing the nutrient content of organic and conventional bovine milk. There were no significant differences in total SFA and MUFA concentrations between organic and conventional milk. However, concentrations of total PUFA and n-3 PUFA were significantly higher in organic milk, by an estimated 7 (95 % CI -1, 15) % and 56 (95 % CI 38, 74) %, respectively. Concentrations of α-linolenic acid (ALA), very long-chain n-3 fatty acids (EPA+DPA+DHA) and conjugated linoleic acid were also significantly higher in organic milk, by an 69 (95 % CI 53, 84) %, 57 (95 % CI 27, 87) % and 41 (95 % CI 14, 68) %, respectively. As there were no significant differences in total n-6 PUFA and linoleic acid (LA) concentrations, the n-6:n-3 and LA:ALA ratios were lower in organic milk, by an estimated 71 (95 % CI -122, -20) % and 93 (95 % CI -116, -70) %. It is concluded that organic bovine milk has a more desirable fatty acid composition than conventional milk. Meta-analyses also showed that organic milk has significantly higher α-tocopherol and Fe, but lower I and Se concentrations. Redundancy analysis of data from a large cross-European milk quality survey indicates that the higher grazing/conserved forage intakes in organic systems were the main reason for milk composition differences.
Topics: Animals; Cattle; Dairying; Dietary Fats, Unsaturated; Evidence-Based Practice; Fatty Acids, Omega-3; Food, Organic; Humans; Iodine; Iron, Dietary; Linoleic Acids, Conjugated; Livestock; Milk; Nutritive Value; Selenium; alpha-Tocopherol
PubMed: 26878105
DOI: 10.1017/S0007114516000349 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2015The pure soybean oil based lipid emulsions (S-LE) conventionally used for parenteral nutrition (PN) in preterm infants have high polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The pure soybean oil based lipid emulsions (S-LE) conventionally used for parenteral nutrition (PN) in preterm infants have high polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) content. The newer lipid emulsions (LE) from alternative lipid sources with reduced PUFA content may improve clinical outcomes in preterm infants.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the safety and efficacy of the newer alternative LE compared with the conventional S-LE for PN in preterm infants.
SEARCH METHODS
We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group (CNRG) to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; Issue 7), MEDLINE (1946 to 31 July 2015), EMBASE (1947 to 31 July 2015), CINAHL (1982 to 31 July 2015), Web of Science (31 July 2015), conference proceedings, trial registries (clinicaltrials.gov, controlled-trials.com, WHO's ICTRP), and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials in preterm infants (< 37 weeks), comparing newer alternative LE with S-LE.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Data collection and analysis conformed to the methods of the CNRG. We assessed the quality of evidence for important outcomes using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, in addition to reporting the conventional statistical significance of results.
MAIN RESULTS
Fifteen studies (N = 979 infants) are included in this review. Alternative LE including medium chain triglycerides/long chain triglycerides (MCT/LCT) LE (3 studies; n = 108), MCT-olive-fish-soy oil-LE (MOFS-LE; 7 studies; n = 469), MCT-fish-soy oil-LE (MFS-LE; 1 study; n = 60), olive-soy oil-LE (OS-LE; 7 studies; n = 406), and borage-soy oil-LE (BS-LE; 1 study; n = 34) were compared with S-LE. The different LE were also considered together to compare 'all fish oil containing-LE' versus S-LE (7 studies; n = 499) and 'all alternative LE' versus S-LE (15 studies; n = 979). Some studies had multiple intervention arms and were included in more than one comparison. No study compared pure fish oil-LE or structured-LE to S-LE.The GRADE quality of evidence (GRADE QoE) ranged from 'low' to 'very low.' Evidence came mostly from small single centre studies, many focusing on biochemical aspects as their primary outcomes, with optimal information size not achieved for the important clinical outcomes in any comparison.In the primary outcomes of the review there was a pooled effect towards decreased bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) in OS-LE vs S-LE (4 studies, n = 261) not reaching statistical significance (typical risk ratio (RR) 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46 to 1.04, I² = 32%; typical risk difference (RD) -0.08, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.00, I² = 76%; GRADE QoE: 'very low'). No difference in BPD was observed in any other comparison. There were no statistically significant differences in the primary outcomes of death, growth rate (g/kg/day) or days to regain birth weight in any comparison.Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) stage 1-2 was reported to be statistically significantly lower in one single centre study (n = 80) in the MOFS-LE group compared with the S-LE group (1/40 vs 12/40, respectively; RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.61; RD -0.27, 95% CI -0.43 to -0.12; number needed to benefit (NNTB) 4, 95% CI 2 to 8). However there were no statistically significant differences in the secondary outcome of ROP ≥ stage 3 in any of the individual studies or in any comparison (GRADE QoE: 'low' to 'very low'). No other study reported on ROP stages 1 and 2 separately.There were no statistically significant differences in the secondary outcomes of sepsis, PN associated liver disease (PNALD)/cholestasis, ventilation duration, necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) ≥ stage 2, jaundice requiring treatment, intraventricular haemorrhage grade III-IV, periventricular leukomalacia (PVL), patent ductus arteriosus (PDA), hypertriglyceridaemia, and hyperglycaemia in any comparison.No study reported on neurodevelopmental outcomes or essential fatty acid deficiency.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
All lipid emulsions in this review appeared to be safe and were well tolerated in preterm infants. Compared with the pure soy oil based LE, use of MOFS-LE was associated with a decrease in the early stages (1-2) of ROP in one study. However there were no statistically significant differences in clinically important outcomes including death, growth, BPD, sepsis, ROP ≥ stage 3, and PNALD with the use of newer alternative LE versus the conventional pure soy oil based LE (GRADE QoE ranged from 'low' to 'very low'). Currently there is insufficient evidence to recommend any alternative LE over S-LE or vice versa in preterm infants.Larger randomised studies focusing on important clinical outcomes, targeting specific 'at risk' population subgroups (e.g. extreme prematurity, long term PN, etc), and exploring the effect of different proportions of lipid constituents are required to evaluate the effectiveness of newer lipid emulsions compared with the conventional pure soy based LE in preterm infants.
Topics: Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia; Emulsions; Fatty Acids, Unsaturated; Fish Oils; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Premature; Lipids; Olive Oil; Parenteral Nutrition; Plant Oils; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Retinopathy of Prematurity; Soybean Oil; Triglycerides; gamma-Linolenic Acid
PubMed: 26630252
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009172.pub2 -
Nutricion Hospitalaria Nov 2015chia is a seed rich in such nutrients as proteins, n-3 fatty acids and especially alpha-linolenic acid (ALA), minerals, fibers and antioxidants. Efforts have been made... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
chia is a seed rich in such nutrients as proteins, n-3 fatty acids and especially alpha-linolenic acid (ALA), minerals, fibers and antioxidants. Efforts have been made to assess whether human consumption of chia can reduce cardiovascular risk factors; however, it has not been established as effective and the findings of the few studies to have looked into the matter are inconsistent.
AIM
to systematize the findings of studies assessing the effect the consumption of chia seed, either milled or whole, has in the prevention/control of cardiovascular risk factors in humans.
METHODS
this is a systematic literature review (SLR) with no meta-analysis. The articles scrutinizedwere identified in the electronic databases Lilacs, Medline (Pub- Med version), Cochrane, Scielo, Scopus, and Web of Science under the keywords"dyslipidemia" or "dislipidemia", "hyperlipidemia" or "hiperlipidemia", "obesity" or "obesidade", "salvia"or"salviahispanica", "Lamiaceae" or "chia", "hypertension" or "hipertensão", "hypertrygliceridemia" or "hipertrigliceridemia", and "riscocardiovascular" or "cardiovascularrisk." We chose for our selection English-, Portuguese- or Spanish-language articles about clinical trials on humans and published within the last ten years. The biases of risk analysis were carried out considering 6 of the 8 criteria of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.
FINDINGS
seven studies (n = 200) fit our inclusion criteria. Of the chosen clinical trials, only one was not randomized. Five of the studies were blind experiments. Two of the studies were acute trials, both of them randomized. Of the chia seed interventions, one study showed a significant drop in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and inflammatory markers, yet there was no change in body mass, lipid profile or blood sugar. In four of the studies reviewed there was a significant spike in ALA and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), with no significant change to other parameters. In the acute trials, post-prandial blood sugar was significantly lower. Only one study showed a significant drop in triglycerides (TG), body mass and inflammatory markers; however, the chia seed in that case was mixed with other foods. Most of the studies showed unclear or low risk of bias. Two studies showed a high risk of bias because not all the pre-specified primary outcomes were reported in the findings.
CONCLUSION
most of the studies did not demonstrate statistically significant results in relation to cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors. The evidence regarding the relationship between chia seed consumption and cardiovascular risk factors are insufficient, and the studies included in this review present numerous limitations. Further research is hence needed.
Topics: Cardiovascular Diseases; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Factors; Salvia; Seeds
PubMed: 26545644
DOI: 10.3305/nh.2015.32.5.9394 -
Nutrients Jul 2015Enteral immunomodulatory nutrition is considered as a promising therapy for the treatment of acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ALI/ARDS).... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Enteral Immunomodulatory Diet (Omega-3 Fatty Acid, γ-Linolenic Acid and Antioxidant Supplementation) for Acute Lung Injury and Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
UNLABELLED
Enteral immunomodulatory nutrition is considered as a promising therapy for the treatment of acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ALI/ARDS). However, there are still some divergences, and it is unclear whether this treatment should be recommended for patients with ALI/ARDS. Therefore, we conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of an enteral immunomodulatory diet on the clinical outcomes of ALI/ARDS patients.
METHODS
We retrieved potentially relevant clinical trials though electronic databases. All trials of enteral immunomodulatory diet for ALI/ARDS were included. Analyses of the overall all-cause mortality, 28-day ventilator-free days and 28-day intensive care unit (ICU) free days were conducted.
RESULTS
In total six controlled trials were evaluated. The pooled results did not show a significant reduction in the risk of all-cause mortality (M-H RR (the overall Mantel-Haenszel relative risk), 0.81 (95% CI, 0.50-1.31); p = 0.38; 6 trials, n = 717) in ALI/ARDS patients treated with the immunomodulatory diet. This treatment also did not extend the ventilator-free days and ICU-free days. However, patients with high mortality might benefit from this treatment.
CONCLUSIONS
The enteral immunomodulatory diet could not reduce the severity of the patients with ALI/ARDS. Whereas, for ALI/ARDS patients with high mortality, this treatment might reduce the all-cause mortality, but its use should be treated with discretion.
Topics: Acute Lung Injury; Antioxidants; Dietary Fats; Enteral Nutrition; Humans; Respiratory Distress Syndrome; gamma-Linolenic Acid
PubMed: 26184293
DOI: 10.3390/nu7075239