Evidence Hub

Comparative efficacy of omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids on major cardiovascular events: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Yang B, Tseng PT, Hu X, Zeng BY, Chang JP, Liu Y, Chu WJ, Zhang SS et al.

Progress in lipid research, 2022

88,359 participants · 16 citations

Abstract

The role of omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) in primary and secondary prevention on major cardiovascular events (MCE) is inconclusive due to the potential heterogeneity in study designs of formulas, dosages, and ratios of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) from the findings of previous randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Here we conducted a comprehensive narrative review of pre-clinical studies and updated a network meta-analysis (NMA) to determine the comparative efficacy against MCE with different EPA/DHA dosages and formulas. We found that pure EPA was ranked the best option in the secondary prevention (hazard ratio: 0.72, 95% confidence interval: 0.65 to 0.81) from the NMA of 39 RCTs with 88,359 participants. There was no evidence of omega-3 PUFAs' efficacy in primary prevention. The mechanisms of omega-3 PUFAs' cardiovascular protection might link to the effects of anti-inflammation and stabilization of endothelial function from PUFA's derivatives including eicosanoids and the special pre-resolving mediators (SPMs).

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 88,359 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free