补充 N-3 脂肪酸对脊柱关节炎的疗效:系统回顾和荟萃分析

IF 6.6 2区 医学 Q1 NUTRITION & DIETETICS Clinical nutrition Pub Date : 2024-10-23 DOI:10.1016/j.clnu.2024.10.024
Elpida Skouvaklidou , Xenophon Theodoridis , Eleni Tziona , Periklis Vounotrypidis , Theodoros Dimitroulas , Michail Chourdakis
{"title":"补充 N-3 脂肪酸对脊柱关节炎的疗效:系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"Elpida Skouvaklidou ,&nbsp;Xenophon Theodoridis ,&nbsp;Eleni Tziona ,&nbsp;Periklis Vounotrypidis ,&nbsp;Theodoros Dimitroulas ,&nbsp;Michail Chourdakis","doi":"10.1016/j.clnu.2024.10.024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background &amp; aims</h3><div>The study aims to systematically review and meta-analyze randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of n-3 fatty acids (FA) supplementation on spondyloarthritis (SpA) disease activity, inflammatory markers, and imaging.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The study protocol was developed and registered online in advance. The PubMed, SCOPUS, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) electronic databases were systematically searched for RCTs up to April 2024. Two independent reviewers screened, assessed for eligibility, and extracted data from the eligible RCTs. The revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used to assess the quality of trials. The random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled estimates.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We included four RCTs, involving 245 patients with SpA. Supplementation with n-3 FA did not improve physician-reported outcomes [number of tender joints (four trials, standardized mean difference (SMD): −0.22; 95 % confidence interval (CI): −0.74 to 0.29; I<sup>2</sup> = 61 %), number of swollen joints (two trials, SMD: −0.13; 95 % CI: −0.42 to 0.15; I<sup>2</sup> = 0 %)], and patient-reported outcomes [pain (three trials, SMD: −0.16; 95 % CI: −1.03 to 0.70; I<sup>2</sup> = 74 %), Health Assessment Questionnaire (three trials, SMD: −0.04; 95 % CI: −0.78 to 0.70; I<sup>2</sup> = 71 %). The other nine pre-specified outcomes were not analyzed due to lack of information from the original RCTs which were evaluated as «<em>some concerns</em>» or «<em>high risk</em>» of bias.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>In the present systematic review and meta-analysis including placebo-controlled RCTs, n-3 FA supplementation did not show improvement in the reported outcomes. Future RCTs should be conducted with homogenous intervention, placebo, and outcomes to re-examine possible beneficial effects.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10517,"journal":{"name":"Clinical nutrition","volume":"43 12","pages":"Pages 233-240"},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness of N-3 fatty acids supplementation on spondyloarthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Elpida Skouvaklidou ,&nbsp;Xenophon Theodoridis ,&nbsp;Eleni Tziona ,&nbsp;Periklis Vounotrypidis ,&nbsp;Theodoros Dimitroulas ,&nbsp;Michail Chourdakis\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.clnu.2024.10.024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background &amp; aims</h3><div>The study aims to systematically review and meta-analyze randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of n-3 fatty acids (FA) supplementation on spondyloarthritis (SpA) disease activity, inflammatory markers, and imaging.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The study protocol was developed and registered online in advance. The PubMed, SCOPUS, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) electronic databases were systematically searched for RCTs up to April 2024. Two independent reviewers screened, assessed for eligibility, and extracted data from the eligible RCTs. The revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used to assess the quality of trials. The random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled estimates.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We included four RCTs, involving 245 patients with SpA. Supplementation with n-3 FA did not improve physician-reported outcomes [number of tender joints (four trials, standardized mean difference (SMD): −0.22; 95 % confidence interval (CI): −0.74 to 0.29; I<sup>2</sup> = 61 %), number of swollen joints (two trials, SMD: −0.13; 95 % CI: −0.42 to 0.15; I<sup>2</sup> = 0 %)], and patient-reported outcomes [pain (three trials, SMD: −0.16; 95 % CI: −1.03 to 0.70; I<sup>2</sup> = 74 %), Health Assessment Questionnaire (three trials, SMD: −0.04; 95 % CI: −0.78 to 0.70; I<sup>2</sup> = 71 %). The other nine pre-specified outcomes were not analyzed due to lack of information from the original RCTs which were evaluated as «<em>some concerns</em>» or «<em>high risk</em>» of bias.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>In the present systematic review and meta-analysis including placebo-controlled RCTs, n-3 FA supplementation did not show improvement in the reported outcomes. Future RCTs should be conducted with homogenous intervention, placebo, and outcomes to re-examine possible beneficial effects.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10517,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical nutrition\",\"volume\":\"43 12\",\"pages\":\"Pages 233-240\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical nutrition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261561424003820\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NUTRITION & DIETETICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261561424003820","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景& 目的本研究旨在系统回顾和荟萃分析评估补充 n-3 脂肪酸(FA)对脊柱关节炎(SpA)疾病活动、炎症标志物和影像学影响的随机对照试验(RCT)。在PubMed、SCOPUS和Cochrane对照试验中央注册中心(CENTRAL)电子数据库中系统检索了截至2024年4月的RCTs。两名独立审稿人对符合条件的 RCT 进行筛选、资格评估和数据提取。修订版 Cochrane 偏倚风险工具用于评估试验质量。结果我们纳入了四项RCT,涉及245名SpA患者。补充 n-3 FA 并未改善医生报告的结果[触痛关节的数量(四项试验,标准化平均差 (SMD):-0.22;95 % 置信度)]:-0.22;95% 置信区间 (CI):-疼痛(三项试验,SMD:-0.16;95 % CI:-1.03 至 0.70;I2 = 74 %),健康评估问卷(三项试验,SMD:-0.04;95 % CI:-0.78 至 0.70;I2 = 71 %)。结论 在本系统综述和荟萃分析(包括安慰剂对照的 RCTs)中,补充 n-3 FA 并未改善所报告的结果。今后应采用同质干预、同质安慰剂和同质结果进行 RCT 研究,以重新审查可能的有益效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Effectiveness of N-3 fatty acids supplementation on spondyloarthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background & aims

The study aims to systematically review and meta-analyze randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of n-3 fatty acids (FA) supplementation on spondyloarthritis (SpA) disease activity, inflammatory markers, and imaging.

Methods

The study protocol was developed and registered online in advance. The PubMed, SCOPUS, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) electronic databases were systematically searched for RCTs up to April 2024. Two independent reviewers screened, assessed for eligibility, and extracted data from the eligible RCTs. The revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used to assess the quality of trials. The random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled estimates.

Results

We included four RCTs, involving 245 patients with SpA. Supplementation with n-3 FA did not improve physician-reported outcomes [number of tender joints (four trials, standardized mean difference (SMD): −0.22; 95 % confidence interval (CI): −0.74 to 0.29; I2 = 61 %), number of swollen joints (two trials, SMD: −0.13; 95 % CI: −0.42 to 0.15; I2 = 0 %)], and patient-reported outcomes [pain (three trials, SMD: −0.16; 95 % CI: −1.03 to 0.70; I2 = 74 %), Health Assessment Questionnaire (three trials, SMD: −0.04; 95 % CI: −0.78 to 0.70; I2 = 71 %). The other nine pre-specified outcomes were not analyzed due to lack of information from the original RCTs which were evaluated as «some concerns» or «high risk» of bias.

Conclusions

In the present systematic review and meta-analysis including placebo-controlled RCTs, n-3 FA supplementation did not show improvement in the reported outcomes. Future RCTs should be conducted with homogenous intervention, placebo, and outcomes to re-examine possible beneficial effects.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical nutrition
Clinical nutrition 医学-营养学
CiteScore
14.10
自引率
6.30%
发文量
356
审稿时长
28 days
期刊介绍: Clinical Nutrition, the official journal of ESPEN, The European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism, is an international journal providing essential scientific information on nutritional and metabolic care and the relationship between nutrition and disease both in the setting of basic science and clinical practice. Published bi-monthly, each issue combines original articles and reviews providing an invaluable reference for any specialist concerned with these fields.
期刊最新文献
Letter to Editor–Dietary and lifestyle inflammation scores in relation to colorectal cancer recurrence and all-cause mortality: A longitudinal analysis Letter to the Editor–“Dietary and lifestyle inflammation scores in relation to colorectal cancer recurrence and all-cause mortality: A longitudinal analysis” Implementing the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria in Crohn's disease: Prevalence of malnutrition and association with clinical outcomes Phase angle as a marker of muscle quality: A systematic review and meta-analysis Associations between blood markers of glucose metabolism and characteristics of circulating lymphocytes
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1