Intake of legumes and cardiovascular disease: A systematic review and dose–response meta-analysis

11Citations
Citations of this article
46Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Aims: To summarize the evidence on the association between the intake of legumes and the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) overall, coronary heart disease (CHD) and stroke, and to identify optimal intake levels for reduced disease risk through a systematic review and dose–response meta-analysis. Data synthesis: We have systematically searched PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science up to March, 2022 for the retrieval of intervention and observational studies (PROSPERO Reg. number: CRD42021247565). Pooled relative risks (RRs) comparing extreme categories of intake were computed using random-effects models. One-stage dose–response meta-analyses were also performed using random-effects models. 22 831 articles were screened resulting in 26 eligible observational studies (21 prospective cohort and 5 case–control studies). When comparing extreme categories of intake, the consumption of legumes was inversely associated with CVD (n = 25: RR = 0.94; 95%CI:0.89,0.99) and CHD (n = 16: RR = 0.90; 95%CI:0.85,0.96), but not with stroke (n = 9: RR = 1.00; 95%CI:0.93,1.08). We further found evidence for an inverse dose–response association with CHD, increasing in magnitude up to an intake of 400 g/week, after which the benefit seems to level-off. Conclusions: The intake of legumes was associated with a reduced risk of CVD and CHD, but not with stroke, among individuals with the highest consumption levels. An intake level of 400 g/week seemed to provide the optimal cardiovascular benefit. Further research is needed to better understand the role of legumes in stroke subtypes.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Mendes, V., Niforou, A., Kasdagli, M. I., Ververis, E., & Naska, A. (2023). Intake of legumes and cardiovascular disease: A systematic review and dose–response meta-analysis. Nutrition, Metabolism and Cardiovascular Diseases, 33(1), 22–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.numecd.2022.10.006

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free