Effect of diet and omega-3 fatty acid intervention on asymmetric dimethylarginine

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Impaired vasodilatation has been suggested to be caused by inhibition of nitric oxide generation by the recently described asymmetric dimethylarginine (ADMA). In the present study we wanted to explore whether n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) supplementation and/or diet intervention have beneficial influence on endothelial function assessed as plasma levels of ADMA and L-arginine. METHODS: A male population (n = 563, age 70 ± 6 yrs) with long-standing hyperlipidemia, characterized as high risk individuals in 1970–72, was included, randomly allocated to receive placebo n-3 PUFA capsules (corn oil) and no dietary advice (control group), dietary advice (Mediterranean type), n-3 PUFA capsules, or dietary advice and n-3 PUFA combined and followed for 3 years. Fasting blood samples were drawn at baseline and the end of the study. RESULTS: Compliance with both intervention regimens were demonstrated by changes in serum fatty acids and by recordings from a food frequency questionnaire. No influence of either regimens on ADMA levels were obtained. However, n-3 PUFA supplementation was accompanied by a significant increase in L-arginine levels, different from the decrease observed in the placebo group (p < 0.05). In individuals with low body mass index (<26 kg/m(2)), the decrease in L-arginine on placebo was strengthened (p = 0.01), and the L-arginine/ADMA ratio was also significantly reduced (p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: In this rather large randomized intervention study, ADMA levels were not influenced by n-3 PUFA supplementation or dietary counselling. n-3 PUFA did, however, counteract the age-related reduction in L-arginine seen on placebo, especially in lean individuals, which might be discussed as an improvement of endothelial function

Interleukin-18 Is a Strong Predictor of Cardiovascular Events in Elderly Men With the Metabolic Syndrome: Synergistic effect of inflammation and hyperglycemia

OBJECTIVE—The aim of this study was to investigate the role of inflammatory markers as potential predictors of cardiovascular events in subjects with and without the metabolic syndrome

Physical distress is associated with cardiovascular events in a high risk population of elderly men

Background Self-reported health perceptions such as physical distress and quality of life are suggested independent predictors of mortality and morbidity in patients with established cardiovascular disease. This study examined the associations between these factors and three years incidence of cardiovascular events in a population of elderly men with long term hyperlipidemia. Methods We studied observational data in a cohort of 433 men aged 64–76 years from a prospective, 2 × 2 factorial designed, three-year interventional trial. Information of classical risk factors was obtained and the following questionnaires were administered at baseline: Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Physical Symptom Distress Index and Life Satisfaction Index. The occurrence of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular incidences and peripheral arterial disease were registered throughout the study period. Continuous data with skewed distribution was split into tertiles. Hazard ratios (HR) were calculated from Cox regression analyses to assess the associations between physical distress, quality of life and cardiovascular events. Results After three years, 49 cardiovascular events were registered, with similar incidence among subjects with and without established cardiovascular disease. In multivariate analyses adjusted for age, smoking, systolic blood pressure, serum glucose, HADS-anxiety and treatment-intervention, physical distress was positively associated (HR 3.1, 95% CI 1.2 – 7.9 for 3rd versus 1st tertile) and quality of life negatively associated (HR 2.6, 95% CI 1.1–5.8 for 3rd versus 1st tertile) with cardiovascular events. The association remained statistically significant only for physical distress (hazard ratio 2.8 95% CI 1.2 – 6.8, p < 0.05) when both variables were evaluated in the same model. Conclusion Physical distress, but not quality of life, was independently associated with increased risk of cardiovascular events in an observational study of elderly men predominantly without established cardiovascular disease. Trial Registration Trial registration: NCT0076401

Polyunsaturated fatty acids for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease

Background: Evidence on the health effects of total polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) is equivocal. Fish oils are rich in omega-3 PUFA and plant oils in omega-6 PUFA. Evidence suggests increasing PUFA-rich foods, supplements or supplemented foods can reduce serum cholesterol, but may increase body weight, so overall cardiovascular effects are unclear. Objectives: To assess effects of increasing PUFA intake on cardiovascular disease (CVD) and all-cause mortality in adults. Search method: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase to April 2017 and ClinicalTrials.com and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to September 2016, without language restrictions. We checked trials included in relevant systematic reviews. Selection criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing higher with lower PUFA intakes in adults with or without CVD that assessed effects over ≥12 months. We included full-text, abstracts, trials registry entries and unpublished data. Outcomes were all-cause mortality, CVD mortality and events, risk factors (blood lipids, adiposity, blood pressure), and adverse events. We excluded trials where we could not separate effects of PUFA intake from other dietary, lifestyle or medication interventions. Data collection and analysis: Two authors independently screened titles/abstracts, assessed trials for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We wrote to authors of included studies for further data. Meta-analyses used random-effects analysis, sensitivity analyses included fixed-effects and limiting to low summary risk of bias. We assessed GRADE quality of evidence. Main result: We included 49 RCTs randomising 24,272 participants, with duration of one to eight years. Twelve included trials were at low summary risk of bias, 33 recruited participants without cardiovascular disease. Baseline PUFA intake was unclear in most trials, but 3.9% to 8% of total energy intake where reported. Most trials gave supplemental capsules, but eight gave dietary advice, eight gave supplemental foods such as nuts or margarine, and three used a combination of methods to increase PUFA. Increasing PUFA intake probably has little or no effect on all-cause mortality (risk 3.4% vs 3.3% in primary prevention, 11.7% vs 11.5% in secondary prevention, risk ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 to 1.07, 24 trials in 19290 participants), but probably reduces risk of CVD events from 5.8% to 4.9% in primary prevention, 23.3% to 20.8% in secondary prevention (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.01, 20 trials in 17,073 participants), both moderate quality evidence. Increasing PUFA may reduce risk of CHD events from 13.4% to 7.1% primary prevention, 14.3% to 13.7% secondary prevention (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.06, 15 trials, 10,076 participants), CHD death (5.2% to 4.4% primary prevention, 6.8% to 6.1% secondary prevention, RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.06, 9 trials, 8810 participants) and may slightly reduce stroke risk (2.1% to 1.5% primary prevention, RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.44, 11 trials, 14,742 participants), but has little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.26, I2 31%, 16 trials, 15,107 participants) all low quality evidence. Effects of increasing PUFA on major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events and atrial fibrillation are unclear as evidence is of very low quality. Event outcomes were all downgraded for indirectness, as most events occurred in men in westernised countries. Increasing PUFA intake reduces total cholesterol (MD -0.12 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.23 to -0.02, I2 79%, 8072 participants, 26 trials) and probably decreases triglycerides (TG, MD -0.12 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.20 to -0.04, I2 50%, 3905 participants, 20 trials), but has little or no effect on HDL (MD -0.01 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.01, I2 0%, 4674 participants, 18 trials) and LDL (MD -0.01 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.06, I2 44%, 3362 participants, 15 trials). Increasing PUFA probably causes slight weight gain (MD 0.76 kg, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.19, I2 59%, 7100 participants, 12 trials). Effects of increasing PUFA on serious adverse events such as pulmonary embolism and bleeding are unclear as the evidence is of very low quality. Authors' conclusions: Increasing PUFA intake probably reduces risk of CVD events, may reduce risk of CHD events and CHD mortality,and may slightly reduce stroke risk, but has little or no effect on all-cause or CVD mortality. The mechanism may be via lipid reduction, but increasing PUFA probably slightly increases weight

Omega-3 fatty acids for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease

Background: Researchers have suggested that omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids from oily fish (long-chain omega-3 (LCn3), including eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA)), as well as from plants (alpha-linolenic acid (ALA)) benefit cardiovascular health. Guidelines recommend increasing omega-3-rich foods, and sometimes supplementation, but recent trials have not confirmed this. Objectives: To assess effects of increased intake of fish- and plant-based omega-3 for all-cause mortality, cardiovascular (CVD) events, adiposity and lipids. Search methods: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase to April 2017, plus ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry to September 2016, with no language restrictions. We handsearched systematic review references and bibliographies and contacted authors. Selection criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that lasted at least 12 months and compared supplementation and/or advice to increase LCn3 or ALA intake versus usual or lower intake. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed validity. We performed separate random-effects meta-analysis for ALA and LCn3 interventions, and assessed dose-response relationships through meta-regression. Main results: We included 79 RCTs (112,059 participants) in this review update and found that 25 were at low summary risk of bias. Trials were of 12 to 72 months' duration and included adults at varying cardiovascular risk, mainly in high-income countries. Most studies assessed LCn3 supplementation with capsules, but some used LCn3- or ALA-rich or enriched foods or dietary advice compared to placebo or usual diet. Meta-analysis and sensitivity analyses suggested little or no effect of increasing LCn3 on all-cause mortality (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.03, 92,653 participants; 8189 deaths in 39 trials, high-quality evidence), cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.03, 67,772 participants; 4544 CVD deaths in 25 RCTs), cardiovascular events (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.04, 90,378 participants; 14,737 people experienced events in 38 trials, high-quality evidence), coronary heart disease (CHD) mortality (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.09, 73,491 participants; 1596 CHD deaths in 21 RCTs), stroke (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.16, 89,358 participants; 1822 strokes in 28 trials) or arrhythmia (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.05, 53,796 participants; 3788 people experienced arrhythmia in 28 RCTs). There was a suggestion that LCn3 reduced CHD events (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.97, 84,301 participants; 5469 people experienced CHD events in 28 RCTs); however, this was not maintained in sensitivity analyses - LCn3 probably makes little or no difference to CHD event risk. All evidence was of moderate GRADE quality, except as noted. Increasing ALA intake probably makes little or no difference to all-cause mortality (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.20, 19,327 participants; 459 deaths, 5 RCTs),cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.25, 18,619 participants; 219 cardiovascular deaths, 4 RCTs), and it may make little or no difference to CHD events (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.22, 19,061 participants, 397 CHD events, 4 RCTs, low-quality evidence). However, increased ALA may slightly reduce risk of cardiovascular events (from 4.8% to 4.7%, RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.07, 19,327 participants; 884 CVD events, 5 RCTs, low-quality evidence), and probably reduces risk of CHD mortality (1.1% to 1.0%, RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.26, 18,353 participants; 193 CHD deaths, 3 RCTs), and arrhythmia (3.3% to 2.6%, RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.10, 4,837 participants; 141 events, 1 RCT). Effects on stroke are unclear. Sensitivity analysis retaining only trials at low summary risk of bias moved effect sizes towards the null (RR 1.0) for all LCn3 primary outcomes except arrhythmias, but for most ALA outcomes, effect sizes moved to suggest protection. LCn3 funnel plots suggested that adding in missing studies/results would move effect sizes towards null for most primary outcomes. There were no dose or duration effects in subgrouping or meta-regression. There was no evidence that increasing LCn3 or ALA altered serious adverse events, adiposity or lipids, although LCn3 slightly reduced triglycerides and increased HDL. ALA probably reduces HDL (high- or moderate-quality evidence). Authors' conclusions: This is the most extensive systematic assessment of effects of omega-3 fats on cardiovascular health to date. Moderate- and high-quality evidence suggests that increasing EPA and DHA has little or no effect on mortality or cardiovascular health (evidence mainly from supplement trials). Previous suggestions of benefits from EPA and DHA supplements appear to spring from trials with higher risk of bias. Low-quality evidence suggests ALA may slightly reduce CVD event risk, CHD mortality and arrhythmia

Effects of total fat intake on body fatness in adults

Background: The ideal proportion of energy from fat in our food and its relation to body weight is not clear. In order to prevent overweight and obesity in the general population, we need to understand the relationship between the proportion of energy from fat and resulting weight and body fatness in the general population. Objectives: To assess the effects of proportion of energy intake from fat on measures of body fatness (including body weight, waist circumference, percentage body fat and body mass index) in people not aiming to lose weight, using all appropriate randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of at least six months duration. Search methods: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Clinicaltrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) to October 2019. We did not limit the search by language. Selection criteria: Trials fulfilled the following criteria: 1) randomised intervention trial, 2) included adults aged at least 18 years, 3) randomised to a lower fat versus higher fat diet, without the intention to reduce weight in any participants, 4) not multifactorial and 5) assessed a measure of weight or body fatness after at least six months. We duplicated inclusion decisions and resolved disagreement by discussion or referral to a third party. Data collection and analysis: We extracted data on the population, intervention, control and outcome measures in duplicate. We extracted measures of body fatness (body weight, BMI, percentage body fat and waist circumference) independently in duplicate at all available time points. We performed random-effects meta-analyses, meta-regression, subgrouping, sensitivity, funnel plot analyses and GRADE assessment. Main results: We included 37 RCTs (57,079 participants). There is consistent high-quality evidence from RCTs that reducing total fat intake results in small reductions in body fatness; this was seen in almost all included studies and was highly resistant to sensitivity analyses (GRADE high-consistency evidence, not downgraded). The effect of eating less fat (compared with higher fat intake) is a mean body weight reduction of 1.4 kg (95% confidence interval (CI) -1.7 to -1.1 kg, in 53,875 participants from 26 RCTs, I2 = 75%). The heterogeneity was explained in subgrouping and meta-regression. These suggested that greater weight loss results from greater fat reductions in people with lower fat intake at baseline, and people with higher body mass index (BMI) at baseline. The size of the effect on weight does not alter over time and is mirrored by reductions in BMI (MD -0.5 kg/m2, 95% CI -0.6 to -0.3, 46,539 participants in 14 trials, I2 = 21%), waist circumference (MD -0.5 cm, 95% CI -0.7 to -0.2, 16,620 participants in 3 trials; I2 = 21%), and percentage body fat (MD -0.3% body fat, 95% CI -0.6 to 0.00, P = 0.05, in 2350 participants in 2 trials; I2 = 0%). There was no suggestion of harms associated with low fat diets that might mitigate any benefits on body fatness. The reduction in body weight was reflected in small reductions in LDL (-0.13 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.21 to -0.05), and total cholesterol (-0.23 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.32 to -0.14), with little or no effect on HDL cholesterol (-0.02 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.00), triglycerides (0.01 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.07), systolic (-0.75 mmHg, 95% CI -1.42 to -0.07) or diastolic blood pressure(-0.52 mmHg, 95% CI -0.95 to -0.09), all GRADE high-consistency evidence or quality of life (0.04, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.07, on a scale of 0 to 10, GRADE low-consistency evidence). Authors' conclusions: Trials where participants were randomised to a lower fat intake versus a higher fat intake, but with no intention to reduce weight, showed a consistent, stable but small effect of low fat intake on body fatness: slightly lower weight, BMI, waist circumference and percentage body fat compared with higher fat arms. Greater fat reduction, lower baseline fat intake and higher baseline BMI were all associated with greater reductions in weight. There was no evidence of harm to serum lipids, blood pressure or quality of life, but rather of small benefits or no effect