1.
Egg consumption and risk of cardiovascular disease: three large prospective US cohort studies, systematic review, and updated meta-analysis.
Drouin-Chartier, JP, Chen, S, Li, Y, Schwab, AL, Stampfer, MJ, Sacks, FM, Rosner, B, Willett, WC, Hu, FB, Bhupathiraju, SN
BMJ (Clinical research ed.). 2020;368:m513
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Eggs have a high cholesterol content and have therefore been associated with a risk for heart disease. However, studies to substantiate this have been conflicting, with some studies showing associations and others not. This systematic review and meta-analysis of over five million people and 763 studies aimed to evaluate the association between egg intake and the risk of heart disease. The results showed that higher egg intake was associated with a poor diet. Egg intake was not associated with heart disease and this was evident even in people who ate at least one egg per day. Even in people with other associated diseases, such as type 2 diabetes and high blood pressure, egg intake was not associated with heart disease. It was concluded that egg consumption does not increase an individual’s risk for heart disease. This study could be used by healthcare professionals to justify the recommendation that patients at risk of heart disease or those who have heart disease, can still eat up to one egg per day, without risk of exacerbating their condition.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the association between egg intake and cardiovascular disease risk among women and men in the United States, and to conduct a meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. DESIGN Prospective cohort study, and a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. SETTING Nurses' Health Study (NHS, 1980-2012), NHS II (1991-2013), Health Professionals' Follow-Up Study (HPFS, 1986-2012). PARTICIPANTS Cohort analyses included 83 349 women from NHS, 90 214 women from NHS II, and 42 055 men from HPFS who were free of cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and cancer at baseline. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Incident cardiovascular disease, which included non-fatal myocardial infarction, fatal coronary heart disease, and stroke. RESULTS Over up to 32 years of follow-up (>5.54 million person years), 14 806 participants with incident cardiovascular disease were identified in the three cohorts. Participants with a higher egg intake had a higher body mass index, were less likely to be treated with statins, and consumed more red meats. Most people consumed between one and less than five eggs per week. In the pooled multivariable analysis, consumption of at least one egg per day was not associated with incident cardiovascular disease risk after adjustment for updated lifestyle and dietary factors associated with egg intake (hazard ratio for at least one egg per day v less than one egg per month 0.93, 95% confidence interval 0.82 to 1.05). In the updated meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies (33 risk estimates, 1 720 108 participants, 139 195 cardiovascular disease events), an increase of one egg per day was not associated with cardiovascular disease risk (pooled relative risk 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.93 to 1.03, I2=62.3%). Results were similar for coronary heart disease (21 risk estimates, 1 411 261 participants, 59 713 coronary heart disease events; 0.96, 0.91 to 1.03, I2=38.2%), and stroke (22 risk estimates, 1 059 315 participants, 53 617 stroke events; 0.99, 0.91 to 1.07, I2=71.5%). In analyses stratified by geographical location (P for interaction=0.07), no association was found between egg consumption and cardiovascular disease risk among US cohorts (1.01, 0.96 to 1.06, I2=30.8%) or European cohorts (1.05, 0.92 to 1.19, I2=64.7%), but an inverse association was seen in Asian cohorts (0.92, 0.85 to 0.99, I2=44.8%). CONCLUSIONS Results from the three cohorts and from the updated meta-analysis show that moderate egg consumption (up to one egg per day) is not associated with cardiovascular disease risk overall, and is associated with potentially lower cardiovascular disease risk in Asian populations. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION PROSPERO CRD42019129650.
2.
Breakfast Skipping, Body Composition, and Cardiometabolic Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.
Bonnet, JP, Cardel, MI, Cellini, J, Hu, FB, Guasch-Ferré, M
Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.). 2020;28(6):1098-1109
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Breakfast has been considered the most important meal of the day. However, despite the fairly consistent association of breakfast consumption with decreased body weight, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown equivocal results. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs evaluating the effect of skipping breakfast on body composition and cardiometabolic risk factors over a period of at least 4 weeks. This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs. A total of 425 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Participant range of age was 18 to 65 years old, with a mean age of 35 years. This study demonstrates that breakfast skipping compared with breakfast consumption over the short-term (4 to 16 weeks) results in weight loss without significant changes in other body composition parameters. Furthermore, breakfast skipping, as compared with breakfast consumption, led to significant increases in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Authors conclude that although breakfast skipping had a modest impact on weight loss in the short term, its long-term impact on body composition and cardiometabolic health requires further study.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of skipping breakfast on body composition and cardiometabolic risk factors. METHODS This study conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating breakfast skipping compared with breakfast consumption. Inclusion criteria included age ≥ 18, intervention duration ≥ 4 weeks, ≥ 7 participants per group, and ≥ 1 body composition measure. Random-effects meta-analyses of the effect of breakfast skipping on body composition and cardiometabolic risk factors were performed. RESULTS Seven RCTs (n = 425 participants) with an average duration of 8.6 weeks were included. Compared with breakfast consumption, breakfast skipping significantly reduced body weight (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -0.54 kg [95% CI: -1.05 to -0.03], P = 0.04, I2 = 21.4%). Percent body fat was reported in 5 studies and was not significantly different between breakfast skippers and consumers. Three studies reported on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL), which was increased in breakfast skippers as compared with breakfast consumers (WMD = 9.24 mg/dL [95% CI: 2.18 to 16.30], P = 0.01). Breakfast skipping did not lead to significant differences in blood pressure, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, triglycerides, C-reactive protein, insulin, fasting glucose, leptin, homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance, or ghrelin. CONCLUSIONS Breakfast skipping may have a modest impact on weight loss and may increase LDL in the short term. Further studies are needed to provide additional insight into the effects of breakfast skipping.
3.
Paleolithic nutrition for metabolic syndrome: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Manheimer, EW, van Zuuren, EJ, Fedorowicz, Z, Pijl, H
The American journal of clinical nutrition. 2015;102(4):922-32
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Metabolic syndrome is a cluster of 5 risk factors, including waist circumference, blood pressure, and serum concentrations of glucose, triglycerides, and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol in the fasting condition. These often occur in concert and predispose people to type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether current evidence supports the idea that Paleolithic nutrition improves risk factors for chronic disease more than do other dietary interventions in people with one or more components of the metabolic syndrome. The study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of 4 randomized controlled trials that compared Paleolithic nutrition with any other dietary intervention in participants with one or more of the 5 components of the metabolic syndrome. Results indicate that Paleolithic nutrition resulted in greater short-term pooled improvements on each of the 5 components of metabolic syndrome than did currently recommended guideline-based control diets. However, the greater pooled improvements did not reach significance for 2 of the 5 components (i.e., HDL cholesterol and fasting blood sugar). Authors conclude that the available data warrant additional evaluations of the health benefits of Paleolithic nutrition.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Paleolithic nutrition, which has attracted substantial public attention lately because of its putative health benefits, differs radically from dietary patterns currently recommended in guidelines, particularly in terms of its recommendation to exclude grains, dairy, and nutritional products of industry. OBJECTIVE We evaluated whether a Paleolithic nutritional pattern improves risk factors for chronic disease more than do other dietary interventions. DESIGN We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the Paleolithic nutritional pattern with any other dietary pattern in participants with one or more of the 5 components of metabolic syndrome. Two reviewers independently extracted study data and assessed risk of bias. Outcome data were extracted from the first measurement time point (≤6 mo). A random-effects model was used to estimate the average intervention effect. The quality of the evidence was rated with the use of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. RESULTS Four RCTs that involved 159 participants were included. The 4 control diets were based on distinct national nutrition guidelines but were broadly similar. Paleolithic nutrition resulted in greater short-term improvements than did the control diets (random-effects model) for waist circumference (mean difference: -2.38 cm; 95% CI: -4.73, -0.04 cm), triglycerides (-0.40 mmol/L; 95% CI: -0.76, -0.04 mmol/L), systolic blood pressure (-3.64 mm Hg; 95% CI: -7.36, 0.08 mm Hg), diastolic blood pressure (-2.48 mm Hg; 95% CI: -4.98, 0.02 mm Hg), HDL cholesterol (0.12 mmol/L; 95% CI: -0.03, 0.28 mmol/L), and fasting blood sugar (-0.16 mmol/L; 95% CI: -0.44, 0.11 mmol/L). The quality of the evidence for each of the 5 metabolic components was moderate. The home-delivery (n = 1) and dietary recommendation (n = 3) RCTs showed similar effects with the exception of greater improvements in triglycerides relative to the control with the home delivery. None of the RCTs evaluated an improvement in quality of life. CONCLUSIONS The Paleolithic diet resulted in greater short-term improvements in metabolic syndrome components than did guideline-based control diets. The available data warrant additional evaluations of the health benefits of Paleolithic nutrition. This systematic review was registered at PROSPERO (www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO) as CRD42014015119.