1.
Diabetes-specific formulas high in monounsaturated fatty acids and metabolic outcomes in patients with diabetes or hyperglycaemia. A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Sanz-París, A, Matía-Martín, P, Martín-Palmero, Á, Gómez-Candela, C, Camprubi Robles, M
Clinical nutrition (Edinburgh, Scotland). 2020;(11):3273-3282
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to compare the metabolic benefits of diabetes-specific formulas (DSF) high in monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFA) with standard formulas (STDF) in adult patients with type 1, type 2 diabetes or stress-induced hyperglycaemia. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted through a literature search using different electronic databases from the index date to December 2018. We included randomised controlled trials that assessed the health benefits of high MUFA DSF vs STDF. Included outcomes were glycaemic control, lipid metabolism and tolerance. Effect sizes were calculated as standardised mean differences (SMDs) (<0.4 were considered small, 0.4-0.7 moderate and >0.7 large). This systematic review was registered as CRD42018108931 on Prospero. RESULTS Of 385 references reviewed, 18 studies involving 845 adults met our inclusion criteria and contributed to the meta-analysis. Use of a high MUFA DSF compared with a STDF was associated with a statistically significant decrease in peak of postprandial glucose [SMD -1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.44 to -0.61], incremental glucose response (SMD -1.19, 95% CI -1.71 to -0.68), area under the curve of plasma insulin (SMD -0.65, 95% CI -1.03 to -0.26), mean blood glucose level (SMD -0.41, 95% CI -0.63 to -0.19), glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) change (SMD -0.63, 95% CI -1.21 to -0.05), glucose variability (SMD -0.93, -1.55 to -0.31), mean administered insulin dose (SMD -0.49, 95% CI -0.85 to -0.14), mean blood triglycerides (SMD -0.34, 95% CI -0.65 to -0.03) and increase of mean blood high-density lipoproteins (SMD +0.42, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.76). Non-significant differences were found for tolerance [odds ratio (OR) 0.95, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.05]. CONCLUSIONS This meta-analysis shows that a DSF (oral supplements and tube feeds) high in MUFAs can improve glucose control and metabolic risk factors among patients with diabetes or stress-induced hyperglycaemia compared with a STDF.
2.
Effect of high-carbohydrate or high-monounsaturated fatty acid diets on blood pressure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Jovanovski, E, de Castro Ruiz Marques, A, Li, D, Ho, HVT, Blanco Mejia, S, Sievenpiper, JL, Zurbau, A, Komishon, A, Duvnjak, L, Bazotte, RB, et al
Nutrition reviews. 2019;(1):19-31
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
CONTEXT Current dietary guidelines for cardiovascular disease risk management recommend restricting intake of saturated fatty acids (SFAs). However, the optimal macronutrient profile, in the context of a low-SFA diet, remains controversial. The blood-pressure effect of replacing SFAs in diets with monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFAs) compared with carbohydrate has not been quantified to date. OBJECTIVE To synthesize the evidence for the effect of substituting a high-carbohydrate (high-CHO) diet for a high-monounsaturated fatty acid (high-MUFA) diet on blood pressure, a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials in a population without health restrictions was conducted. DATA SOURCES MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials were searched through June 7, 2017. Randomized controlled trials of > 3 weeks duration that assessed the effect of high-MUFA diets in isocaloric substitution for high-CHO diets on systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were included. DATA EXTRACTION Data were pooled using the generic-inverse variance method with random effects models and expressed as mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed by Cochran Q statistic and quantified by the I2 statistic. The quality of the evidence was assessed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. RESULTS Fourteen trials (n = 980 participants) were included in the analysis. Comparatively, the high-MUFA diets in isocaloric substitution for high-CHO diets did not demonstrate a greater reduction in blood pressure (SBP: MD, -0.08 mmHg [95%CI, -1.01 to 0.84], P = 0.86; DBP: MD = 0.01 mmHg [95%CI, -0.73 to 0.75], P = 0.98). The overall quality of the evidence was assessed as moderate. CONCLUSIONS In the context of low SFAs, high-MUFA diets in isocaloric substitution for high-CHO diets did not affect blood pressure in individuals with and without hypertension. Large-scale trials achieving higher MUFA targets are required to support these findings. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV ID NCT02626325.
3.
Fluvastatin for lowering lipids.
Adams, SP, Sekhon, SS, Tsang, M, Wright, JM
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2018;(3):CD012282
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Fluvastatin is thought to be the least potent statin on the market, however, the dose-related magnitude of effect of fluvastatin on blood lipids is not known. OBJECTIVES Primary objectiveTo quantify the effects of various doses of fluvastatin on blood total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein (LDL cholesterol), high-density lipoprotein (HDL cholesterol), and triglycerides in participants with and without evidence of cardiovascular disease.Secondary objectivesTo quantify the variability of the effect of various doses of fluvastatin.To quantify withdrawals due to adverse effects (WDAEs) in randomised placebo-controlled trials. SEARCH METHODS The Cochrane Hypertension Information Specialist searched the following databases for randomised controlled trials up to February 2017: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2017, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1946 to February Week 2 2017), MEDLINE In-Process, MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print, Embase (1974 to February Week 2 2017), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, CDSR, DARE, Epistemonikos and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also contacted authors of relevant papers regarding further published and unpublished work. No language restrictions were applied. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised placebo-controlled and uncontrolled before and after trials evaluating the dose response of different fixed doses of fluvastatin on blood lipids over a duration of three to 12 weeks in participants of any age with and without evidence of cardiovascular disease. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently assessed eligibility criteria for studies to be included, and extracted data. We entered data from placebo-controlled and uncontrolled before and after trials into Review Manager 5 as continuous and generic inverse variance data, respectively. WDAEs information was collected from the placebo-controlled trials. We assessed all trials using the 'Risk of bias' tool under the categories of sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, incomplete outcome data, selective reporting, and other potential biases. MAIN RESULTS One-hundred and forty-five trials (36 placebo controlled and 109 before and after) evaluated the dose-related efficacy of fluvastatin in 18,846 participants. The participants were of any age with and without evidence of cardiovascular disease, and fluvastatin effects were studied within a treatment period of three to 12 weeks. Log dose-response data over doses of 2.5 mg to 80 mg revealed strong linear dose-related effects on blood total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol and a weak linear dose-related effect on blood triglycerides. There was no dose-related effect of fluvastatin on blood HDL cholesterol. Fluvastatin 10 mg/day to 80 mg/day reduced LDL cholesterol by 15% to 33%, total cholesterol by 11% to 25% and triglycerides by 3% to 17.5%. For every two-fold dose increase there was a 6.0% (95% CI 5.4 to 6.6) decrease in blood LDL cholesterol, a 4.2% (95% CI 3.7 to 4.8) decrease in blood total cholesterol and a 4.2% (95% CI 2.0 to 6.3) decrease in blood triglycerides. The quality of evidence for these effects was judged to be high. When compared to atorvastatin and rosuvastatin, fluvastatin was about 12-fold less potent than atorvastatin and 46-fold less potent than rosuvastatin at reducing LDL cholesterol. Very low quality of evidence showed no difference in WDAEs between fluvastatin and placebo in 16 of 36 of these short-term trials (risk ratio 1.52 (95% CI 0.94 to 2.45). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Fluvastatin lowers blood total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol and triglyceride in a dose-dependent linear fashion. Based on the effect on LDL cholesterol, fluvastatin is 12-fold less potent than atorvastatin and 46-fold less potent than rosuvastatin. This review did not provide a good estimate of the incidence of harms associated with fluvastatin because of the short duration of the trials and the lack of reporting of adverse effects in 56% of the placebo-controlled trials.