Impact of different types of olive oil on cardiovascular risk factors: A systematic review and network meta-analysis
Schwingshackl L, Krause M, Schmucker C, Hoffmann G, Rücker G, Meerpohl JJ
Nutrition, metabolism, and cardiovascular diseases : NMCD · 57 citas
Cómo se estudió
- Diseño
- Metaanálisis (indexado por PubMed)
- Estudiado en
- Personas
- Resultado principal
- Marcadores de salud y funcionamiento
- Consumo medido con
- No se indica
Quién lo pagó
- Financiación
- Financiación independiente
- Gobierno
- Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
- Subvenciones
- Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (RU1747/1-2)
Según 1 financiador declarado.
Publicación
- Publicado
- 2019-07-08 · Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis · vol. 29 · número 10 · págs. 1030–1039
- Editorial
- Elsevier BV
- Citado
- 85 citas · más que el 44% de estudios similares · 0.5× el promedio de su campo
- Referencias
- 56 trabajos
- Acceso
- De pago
- Áreas de investigación
- Edible Oils Quality and Analysis · Fatty Acid Research and Health · Nutritional Studies and Diet
- Palabras clave
- olive oil, extra virgin olive oil, refined olive oil, phenolic compounds, cardiovascular risk factors, LDL cholesterol, oxidized LDL, blood pressure, cholesterol, dietary intervention
- MeSH
- humans, cardiovascular diseases, hypertension, lipids, risk assessment, risk factors, risk reduction behavior, health status, diet, mediterranean, nutritive value, blood pressure, adult, aged, middle aged, female, male, dyslipidemias, randomized controlled trials as topic, protective factors, biomarkers, olive oil, diet, healthy
6 autores
- Lukas Schwingshackl🇩🇪 · autor de correspondenciaUniversity of Freiburg
- Marc Krause🇩🇪University of Freiburg
- Christine M. Schmucker🇩🇪University of Freiburg
- Georg E. HOFFMANN🇦🇹University of Vienna
- Gerta Rücker🇩🇪University of Freiburg
- Joerg J Meerpohl🇩🇪University of Freiburg
Resumen
El texto original del estudio, en el idioma en que se publicó.
Background and aim
This network meta-analysis (NMA) compares the effects of different types of olive oil (OO) on cardiovascular risk factors.
Methods and results
Literature search was conducted on three electronic databases (Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central).
Inclusion criteria
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (≥3 weeks duration of intervention) comparing at least two of the following types of OO: refined OO (ROO), mixed OO (MOO), low phenolic (extra) virgin OO (LP(E)VOO), and high phenolic (extra) virgin OO (HP(E)VOO). Random-effects NMA was performed for seven outcomes; and surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was estimated, using an analytical approach (P-score). Thirteen RCTs (16 reports) with 611 mainly healthy participants (mean age: 26-70 years) were identified. No differences for total cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol, triacylglycerols, and diastolic blood pressure were observed comparing ROO, MOO, LP(E)VOO and HP(E)VOO. HP(E)VOO slightly reduce LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) compared to LP(E)VOO (mean difference [MD]: -0.14 mmol/L, 95%-CI: -0.28, -0.01). Both, HP(E)VOO and LP(E)VOO reduces SBP compared to ROO (range of MD: -2.99 to -2.87 mmHg), and HP(E)VOO may improve oxidized LDL-cholesterol (oxLDL-C) compared to ROO (standardized MD: -0.68, 95%-CI: -1.31, -0.04). In secondary analyses, EVOO may reduce oxLDL-C compared to ROO, and a dose-response relationship between higher intakes of phenolic compounds from OO and lower SBP and oxLDL-C values was detected. HP(E)VOO was ranked as best treatment for LDL-C (P-score: 0.83), oxLDL-C (0.88), and SBP (0.75).
Conclusions
HP(E)VOO may improve some cardiovascular risk factors, however, public health implications are limited by overall low or moderate certainty of evidence.
Resumen vía Europe PMC. Los derechos de autor siguen siendo de los autores o la editorial.
Confianza de la comunidad
Cargando…
¿Cuánto confías en los hallazgos de este estudio?
Comentarios
¿Algo está mal aquí?
Señala este estudio si su información, etiquetas o financiación parecen incorrectas. Un editor revisa cada señalamiento.
Información educativa sobre investigación publicada. No es consejo médico ni una recomendación para empezar o dejar nada.