Institute for Evidence in Medicine Medical Center - Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Cochrane Germany Foundation, Cochrane Germany, Freiburg, Germany.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 24;2(2):CD013556. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013556.pub2.
BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) are a major cause of disability and the leading cause of death worldwide. To reduce mortality and morbidity, prevention strategies such as following an optimal diet are crucial. In recent years, low-gluten and gluten-free diets have gained strong popularity in the general population. However, study results on the benefits of a gluten-reduced or gluten-free diet are conflicting, and it is unclear whether a gluten-reduced diet has an effect on the primary prevention of CVD. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of a gluten-reduced or gluten-free diet for the primary prevention of CVD in the general population. SEARCH METHODS: We systematically searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and Web of Science up to June 2021 without language restrictions or restrictions regarding publication status. Additionally, we searched ClinicalTrials.gov for ongoing or unpublished trials and checked reference lists of included studies as well as relevant systematic reviews for additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We planned to include randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs), such as prospective cohort studies, comparing a low-gluten or gluten-free diet or providing advice to decrease gluten consumption with no intervention, diet as usual, or a reference gluten-intake category. The population of interest comprised adults from the general population, including those at increased risk for CVD (primary prevention). We excluded cluster-RCTs, case-control studies, studies focusing on participants with a previous myocardial infarction and/or stroke, participants who have undergone a revascularisation procedure as well as participants with angina or angiographically-defined coronary heart disease, with a confirmed diagnosis of coeliac disease or with type 1 diabetes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed eligibility of studies in a two-step procedure following Cochrane methods. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool (RoB2) and the 'Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions' (ROBINS-I) tool, and the certainty of evidence was rated using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: One RCT and three NRSIs (with an observational design reporting data on four cohorts: Health Professionals Follow-up Study (HPFS), Nurses' Health Study (NHS-I), NHS-II, UK Biobank) met the inclusion criteria. The RCT was conducted in Italy (60 participants, mean age 41 ± 12.1 years), two NRSIs (three cohorts, HPFS, NHS-I, NHS II) were conducted across the USA (269,282 health professionals aged 24 to 75 years) and one NRSI (Biobank cohort) was conducted across the UK (159,265 participants aged 49 to 62 years). Two NRSIs reported that the lowest gluten intake ranged between 0.0 g/day and 3.4 g/day and the highest gluten intake between 6.2 g/day and 38.4 g/day. The NRSI reporting data from the UK Biobank referred to a median gluten intake of 8.5 g/day with an interquartile range from 5.1 g/day to 12.4 g/day without providing low- and high-intake categories. Cardiovascular mortality From a total of 269,282 participants, 3364 (1.3%) died due to cardiovascular events during 26 years of follow-up. Low-certainty evidence may show no association between gluten intake and cardiovascular mortality (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for low- versus high-gluten intake 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95 to 1.06; 2 NRSIs (3 cohorts)). All-cause mortality From a total of 159,265 participants, 6259 (3.9%) died during 11.1 years of follow-up. Very low-certainty evidence suggested that it is unclear whether gluten intake is associated with all-cause mortality (adjusted HR for low vs high gluten intake 1.00, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.01; 1 NRSI (1 cohort)). Myocardial infarction From a total of 110,017 participants, 4243 (3.9%) participants developed non-fatal myocardial infarction within 26 years. Low-certainty evidence suggested that gluten intake may not be associated with the development of non-fatal myocardial infarction (adjusted HR for low versus high gluten intake 0.99, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.10; 1 NRSI (2 cohorts)). Lowering gluten intake by 5 g/day also showed no association on the primary prevention of non-fatal and fatal myocardial infarction (composite endpoint) in linear dose-response meta-analyses (adjusted HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.06; 1 NRSI (2 cohorts)). Coronary risk factors Type 2 diabetes From a total of 202,114 participants, 15,947 (8.0%) developed type 2 diabetes after a follow-up between 22 and 28 years. There was low-certainty evidence that a lower compared with a higher gluten intake may be associated with a slightly increased risk to develop type 2 diabetes (adjusted HR 1.14, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.22; 1 NRSI (3 cohorts)). Furthermore, lowering gluten intake by 5 g/day may be associated with a slightly increased risk to develop type 2 diabetes in linear dose-response meta-analyses (adjusted HR 1.12, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.16; 1 NRSI (3 cohorts)). Blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein level, body mass index (BMI) After six months of follow-up, very low-certainty evidence suggested that it is unclear whether gluten intake affects systolic blood pressure (mean difference (MD) -6.9, 95% CI -17.1 to 3.3 mmHg). There was also no difference between the interventions for diastolic blood pressure (MD -0.8, 95% CI -5.9 to 4.3 mmHg), low-density lipoprotein levels (MD -0.1, 95% CI -0.5 to 0.3 mmol/L) and BMI (MD -0.1, 95% CI -3.3 to 3.1 kg/m²). No study reported data on adverse events or on other outcomes. Funding sources did not appear to have distorted the results in any of the studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Very low-certainty evidence suggested that it is unclear whether gluten intake is associated with all-cause mortality. Our findings also indicate that low-certainty evidence may show little or no association between gluten intake and cardiovascular mortality and non-fatal myocardial infarction. Low-certainty evidence suggested that a lower compared with a higher gluten intake may be associated with a slightly increased risk to develop type 2 diabetes - a major cardiovascular risk factor. For other cardiovascular risk factors it is unclear whether there is a difference between a gluten-free and normal diet. Given the limited findings from this review predominantly based on observational studies, no recommendations for practice can be made.
背景:心血管疾病(CVD)是全球残疾和死亡的主要原因。为了降低死亡率和发病率,预防策略(如遵循最佳饮食)至关重要。近年来,低麸质和无麸质饮食在普通人群中受到了强烈的欢迎。然而,关于减少麸质或无麸质饮食对心血管疾病初级预防益处的研究结果存在争议,目前尚不清楚减少麸质的饮食是否对心血管疾病的初级预防有影响。
目的:确定减少麸质或无麸质饮食对普通人群心血管疾病初级预防的影响。
检索方法:我们系统地检索了 CENTRAL、MEDLINE、Embase、CINAHL 和 Web of Science,截至 2021 年 6 月,没有语言限制或对出版物状态的限制。此外,我们在 ClinicalTrials.gov 上搜索了正在进行或未发表的试验,并检查了纳入研究的参考文献列表以及相关系统评价,以获取其他研究。
选择标准:我们计划纳入随机对照试验(RCT)和非随机干预研究(NRSI),例如前瞻性队列研究,比较低麸质或无麸质饮食或提供减少麸质摄入的建议与无干预、常规饮食或参考麸质摄入量类别。感兴趣的人群包括来自普通人群的成年人,包括那些有心血管疾病(初级预防)风险增加的成年人。我们排除了群组 RCT、病例对照研究、研究对象为既往心肌梗死和/或中风的参与者、已接受血管重建手术的参与者以及有胸痛或血管造影定义的冠心病、确诊乳糜泻或 1 型糖尿病的参与者。
数据收集和分析:两名综述作者按照 Cochrane 方法分两步独立评估研究的纳入标准。使用 Cochrane 偏倚风险工具(RoB2)和“非随机干预研究的偏倚风险(ROBINS-I)”工具评估偏倚风险(RoB),并使用 GRADE 方法评估证据的确定性。
主要结果:一项 RCT 和三项 NRSI(具有观察设计,报告了四个队列的数据:健康专业人员随访研究(HPFS)、护士健康研究 [NHS-I]、NHS-II、英国生物库)符合纳入标准。该 RCT 在意大利进行(60 名参与者,平均年龄 41±12.1 岁),两项 NRSI(三项队列,HPFS、NHS-I、NHS II)在美国进行,一项 NRSI(生物库队列)在英国进行(159265 名年龄在 49 至 62 岁之间的参与者)。两项 NRSI 报告最低麸质摄入量在 0.0 g/天至 3.4 g/天之间,最高麸质摄入量在 6.2 g/天至 38.4 g/天之间。报告英国生物库数据的 NRSI 提到中位麸质摄入量为 8.5 g/天,四分位距为 5.1 g/天至 12.4 g/天,未提供低和高摄入量类别。心血管死亡率从总共 269282 名参与者中,有 3364 名(1.3%)在 26 年的随访期间死于心血管事件。低确定性证据可能表明,麸质摄入量与心血管死亡率之间没有关联(低与高麸质摄入量的调整后的危害比(HR)为 1.00,95%置信区间(CI)为 0.95 至 1.06;2 项 NRSI(3 项队列))。全因死亡率从总共 159265 名参与者中,有 6259 名(3.9%)在 11.1 年的随访期间死亡。非常低确定性证据表明,目前尚不清楚麸质摄入量是否与全因死亡率有关(低与高麸质摄入量的调整后 HR 为 1.00,95%CI 为 0.99 至 1.01;1 项 NRSI(1 项队列))。心肌梗死从总共 110017 名参与者中,有 4243 名(3.9%)参与者在 26 年内发生非致命性心肌梗死。低确定性证据表明,麸质摄入可能与非致命性心肌梗死的发生无关(低与高麸质摄入量的调整后 HR 为 0.99,95%CI 为 0.89 至 1.10;1 项 NRSI(2 项队列))。每日降低 5 克麸质的摄入量也与非致命性和致命性心肌梗死(复合终点)的初级预防无关,线性剂量反应荟萃分析显示(调整后的 HR 为 1.02,95%CI 为 0.98 至 1.06;1 项 NRSI(2 项队列))。冠状动脉危险因素 2 型糖尿病从总共 202114 名参与者中,有 15947 名(8.0%)在 22 至 28 年的随访期间发生 2 型糖尿病。低确定性证据表明,与较高的麸质摄入量相比,较低的麸质摄入量可能与发生 2 型糖尿病的风险略有增加有关(调整后的 HR 为 1.14,95%CI 为 1.07 至 1.22;1 项 NRSI(3 项队列))。此外,线性剂量反应荟萃分析表明,每日降低 5 克麸质的摄入量可能与发生 2 型糖尿病的风险略有增加有关(调整后的 HR 为 1.12,95%CI 为 1.08 至 1.16;1 项 NRSI(3 项队列))。血压、低密度脂蛋白水平、体重指数(BMI)随访 6 个月后,非常低确定性证据表明,目前尚不清楚麸质摄入是否会影响收缩压(平均差异(MD)-6.9,95%CI-17.1 至 3.3mmHg)。干预措施对舒张压(MD-0.8,95%CI-5.9 至 4.3mmHg)、低密度脂蛋白水平(MD-0.1,95%CI-0.5 至 0.3mmol/L)和 BMI(MD-0.1,95%CI-3.3 至 3.1kg/m²)也没有差异。没有研究报告不良事件或其他结果的数据。资金来源似乎没有在任何研究中扭曲结果。
作者结论:非常低确定性证据表明,目前尚不清楚麸质摄入量是否与全因死亡率有关。我们的研究结果还表明,低确定性证据可能表明,麸质摄入量与心血管死亡率和非致命性心肌梗死之间几乎没有关联或没有关联。低确定性证据表明,与较高的麸质摄入量相比,较低的麸质摄入量可能与发生 2 型糖尿病的风险略有增加有关,2 型糖尿病是一种主要的心血管危险因素。对于其他心血管危险因素,目前尚不清楚无麸质饮食与常规饮食之间是否存在差异。鉴于本综述主要基于观察性研究,且研究结果有限,因此无法提出任何实践建议。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-2-24
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-8-10
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021-11-8
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-8-8
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021-11-5
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-1-28
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-3-4
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-9-23
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021-11-26
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021-9-6
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2025-5-29
Public Health Chall. 2025-2-7
J Clin Med. 2023-3-7
Nutrients. 2023-1-26
Int J Mol Sci. 2022-7-26
J Autism Dev Disord. 2020-2
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019-10-3
J Am Coll Nutr. 2020-2