Hartley Louise, May Michael D, Loveman Emma, Colquitt Jill L, Rees Karen
Division of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, Warwickshire, UK, CV4 7AL.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Jan 7;2016(1):CD011472. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011472.pub2.
The prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a key public health priority. A number of dietary factors have been associated with modifying CVD risk factors. One such factor is dietary fibre which may have a beneficial association with CVD risk factors. There is a need to review the current evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in this area.
The primary objective of this systematic review was to determine the effectiveness of dietary fibre for the primary prevention of CVD.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to January 2015), Ovid EMBASE (1947 to January 2015) and Science Citation Index Expanded (1970 to January 2015) as well as two clinical trial registers in January 2015. We also checked reference lists of relevant articles. No language restrictions were applied.
We selected RCTs that assessed the effects of dietary fibre compared with no intervention or a minimal intervention on CVD and related risk factors. Participants included adults who are at risk of CVD or those from the general population.
Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias; a third author checked any differences. A different author checked analyses.
We included 23 RCTs (1513 participants randomised) examining the effect of dietary fibre. The risk of bias was unclear for most studies and studies had small sample sizes. Few studies had an intervention duration of longer than 12 weeks. There was a wide variety of fibre sources used, with little similarity between groups in the choice of intervention.None of the studies reported on mortality (total or cardiovascular) or cardiovascular events. Results on lipids suggest there is a significant beneficial effect of increased fibre on total cholesterol levels (17 trials (20 comparisons), 1067 participants randomised, mean difference -0.23 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.06), and LDL cholesterol levels (mean difference -0.14 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.22 to -0.06) but not on triglyceride levels (mean difference 0.00 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.05), and there was a very small but statistically significant decrease rather than increase in HDL levels with increased fibre intake (mean difference -0.03 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.06 to -0.01). Fewer studies (10 trials, 661 participants randomised) reported blood pressure outcomes where there is a significant effect of increased fibre consumption on diastolic blood pressure (mean difference -1.77 mmHg, 95% CI -2.61 to -0.92) whilst there is a reduction in systolic blood pressure with fibre but this does not reach statistical significance (mean difference -1.92 mmHg, 95% CI -4.02 to 0.19). There did not appear to be any subgroup effects by the nature of the type of intervention (fibre supplements or provision of foods/advice to increase fibre consumption) or the type of fibre (soluble/insoluble) although the number of studies contributing to each subgroup were small. All analyses need to be viewed with caution given the risks of bias observed for total cholesterol and the statistical heterogeneity observed for systolic blood pressure. Adverse events, where reported, appeared to mostly reflect mild to moderate gastrointestinal side-effects and these were generally reported more in the fibre intervention groups than the control groups.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Studies were short term and therefore did not report on our primary outcomes, CVD clinical events. The pooled analyses for CVD risk factors suggest reductions in total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol with increased fibre intake, and reductions in diastolic blood pressure. There were no obvious effects of subgroup analyses by type of intervention or fibre type but the number of studies included in each of these analyses were small. Risk of bias was unclear in the majority of studies and high for some quality domains so results need to be interpreted cautiously. There is a need for longer term, well-conducted RCTs to determine the effects of fibre type (soluble versus insoluble) and administration (supplements versus foods) on CVD events and risk factors for the primary prevention of CVD.
预防心血管疾病(CVD)是公共卫生的一项关键优先事项。许多饮食因素与改变心血管疾病风险因素有关。其中一个因素是膳食纤维,它可能与心血管疾病风险因素存在有益关联。有必要回顾该领域随机对照试验(RCT)的现有证据。
本系统评价的主要目的是确定膳食纤维对心血管疾病一级预防的有效性。
我们检索了Cochrane图书馆中的Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)、Ovid MEDLINE(1946年至2015年1月)、Ovid EMBASE(1947年至2015年1月)以及科学引文索引扩展版(1970年至2015年1月),并于2015年1月检索了两个临床试验注册库。我们还检查了相关文章的参考文献列表。未设语言限制。
我们选择了评估膳食纤维与无干预或最小干预相比对心血管疾病及相关风险因素影响的随机对照试验。参与者包括有心血管疾病风险的成年人或一般人群。
两位作者独立选择研究、提取数据并评估偏倚风险;第三位作者检查任何差异。另一位作者检查分析情况。
我们纳入了23项随机对照试验(1513名参与者被随机分组)来研究膳食纤维的效果。大多数研究的偏倚风险不明确,且研究样本量较小。很少有研究的干预持续时间超过12周。所使用的纤维来源多种多样,各干预组在选择上几乎没有相似性。没有研究报告死亡率(全因或心血管疾病)或心血管事件。关于血脂的结果表明,纤维摄入量增加对总胆固醇水平有显著有益影响(17项试验(20次比较),1067名参与者被随机分组,平均差值-0.23 mmol/L,95%可信区间-0.40至-0.06),对低密度脂蛋白胆固醇水平也有显著有益影响(平均差值-0.14 mmol/L,95%可信区间-0.22至-0.06),但对甘油三酯水平无显著影响(平均差值0.00 mmol/L,95%可信区间-0.04至0.05),并且随着纤维摄入量增加,高密度脂蛋白水平有非常小但具有统计学意义的降低而非升高(平均差值-0.03 mmol/L,95%可信区间-0.06至-0.01)。较少的研究(10项试验,661名参与者被随机分组)报告了血压结果,其中纤维摄入量增加对舒张压有显著影响(平均差值-1.77 mmHg,95%可信区间-2.61至-0.92);纤维摄入可使收缩压降低,但未达到统计学意义(平均差值-1.92 mmHg,95%可信区间-4.02至0.19)。尽管每个亚组的研究数量较少,但按干预类型(纤维补充剂或提供增加纤维摄入的食物/建议)或纤维类型(可溶/不可溶)进行的亚组分析似乎没有任何亚组效应。鉴于总胆固醇观察到的偏倚风险以及收缩压观察到的统计学异质性,所有分析都需谨慎看待。报告的不良事件似乎大多反映轻度至中度胃肠道副作用,且这些副作用在纤维干预组中通常比对照组报告得更多。
研究为短期研究,因此未报告我们的主要结局,即心血管疾病临床事件。对心血管疾病风险因素的汇总分析表明,纤维摄入量增加可降低总胆固醇和低密度脂蛋白胆固醇,并降低舒张压。按干预类型或纤维类型进行的亚组分析没有明显效果,但这些分析中纳入的研究数量较少。大多数研究的偏倚风险不明确,某些质量领域的偏倚风险较高,因此结果需谨慎解读。需要进行长期、实施良好的随机对照试验,以确定纤维类型(可溶与不可溶)和给药方式(补充剂与食物)对心血管疾病事件及心血管疾病一级预防风险因素的影响。