iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.
iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.



Link to original content: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29991644
Association of Multivitamin and Mineral Supplementation and Risk of Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis - PubMed Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2018 Jul;11(7):e004224.
doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.117.004224.

Association of Multivitamin and Mineral Supplementation and Risk of Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Association of Multivitamin and Mineral Supplementation and Risk of Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Joonseok Kim et al. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2018 Jul.

Abstract

Background: Multiple studies have attempted to identify the association between multivitamin/mineral (MVM) supplementation and cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes, but the benefits remain controversial. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the associations between MVM supplementation and various CVD outcomes, including coronary heart disease (CHD) and stroke.

Methods and results: We conducted a comprehensive search of Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for studies published between January 1970 and August 2016. We included clinical trials and prospective cohort studies in the general population evaluating associations between MVM supplementation and CVD outcomes. Data extraction and quality assessment were independently conducted by 2 authors, and a third author resolved discrepancies. Eighteen studies with 2 019 862 participants and 18 363 326 person-years of follow-up were included in the analysis. Five studies specified the dose/type of MVM supplement and the rest did not. Overall, there was no association between MVM supplementation and CVD mortality (relative risk [RR], 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97-1.04), CHD mortality (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.92-1.13), stroke mortality (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.82-1.09), or stroke incidence (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.91-1.05). There was no association between MVM supplements and CVD or CHD mortality in prespecified subgroups categorized by mean follow-up period, mean age, period of MVM use, sex, type of population, exclusion of patients with history of CHD, and adjustment for diet, adjustment for smoking, adjustment for physical activity, and study site. In contrast, MVM use did seem to be associated with a lower risk of CHD incidence (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.79-0.97). However, this association did not remain significant in the pooled subgroup analysis of randomized controlled trials (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.80-1.19).

Conclusions: Our meta-analysis of clinical trials and prospective cohort studies demonstrates that MVM supplementation does not improve cardiovascular outcomes in the general population.

Keywords: cardiovascular diseases; coronary disease; incidence; mortality; myocardial infarction; stroke.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by