4.6 Review

Modulation of Circulating Trimethylamine N-Oxide Concentrations by Dietary Supplements and Pharmacological Agents: A Systematic Review

期刊

ADVANCES IN NUTRITION
卷 10, 期 5, 页码 876-887

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/advances/nmz012

关键词

trimethylamine N-oxide; gut microbiota; dietary supplements; drugs; metabolic disease

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Discovery of the association of plasma/serum trimethylamine N-oxide (TMAO) concentrations with atherosclerosis has sparked immense interest in exploring TMAO as a predictor of cardiovascular disease risk. A spectrum of antibiotics and other therapeutic strategies have been employed to test their potential to modulate TMAO concentrations, assuming the gut microbiome to be the key source of TMAO. The aim of this systematic review was to determine whether dietary supplements or pharmacological agents affect TMAO concentrations in adults. Six databases were searched (Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, ProQuest, and PubMed) for randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials. Searches were limited to the English language and to studies in adults. Thirteen eligible trials were identified, including 6 studies on dietary supplements and 7 on pharmacological agents. Whereas intervention studies involving dietary supplements were mostly randomized controlled trials, those involving pharmacological agents appeared opportunistic and varied greatly in study design and duration. Different interventional products were tested, and the studies lacked the consistency to reliably synthesize any evidence for the modifiability of TMAO concentrations by dietary supplements or pharmacological agents. Choline and L-carnitine are conditionally essential nutrients, and carefully designed placebo-controlled randomized trials specifically aimed at reducing the synthesis of microflora-dependent TMAO production from choline-containing precursors by pro- and/or prebiotics, antibiotics, or other pharmaceutical agents may be the way forward for future research.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据