4.7 Review

Omega-3 Fatty Acids and Cardiovascular Disease: Summary of the 2016 Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality Evidence Review

期刊

NUTRIENTS
卷 9, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nu9080865

关键词

omega-3 fatty acids; alpha-linolenic acid; eicosapentaenoic acid; docosahexaenoic acid; marine oil; cardiovascular disease; blood pressure; high density lipoprotein; low density lipoprotein cholesterol; triglyceride; systematic review; meta-analysis

资金

  1. Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services [290-2015-00002-I]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

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 0 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.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据