| Literature DB >> 25079225 |
Arno Greyling1, Rouyanne T Ras2, Peter L Zock3, Mario Lorenz4, Maria T Hopman5, Dick H J Thijssen6, Richard Draijer2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Epidemiological evidence has linked consumption of black tea, produced from Camellia sinensis, with a reduced risk of cardiovascular diseases. However, intervention studies on the effects of tea consumption on blood pressure (BP) have reported inconsistent results. Our objective was to conduct a systematic literature review with meta-analysis of controlled human intervention studies examining the effect of tea consumption on BP.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25079225 PMCID: PMC4117505 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0103247
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Flow diagram of the study selection procedure.
Characteristics of 11 controlled intervention studies on tea and blood pressure included in the meta-analysis.
| Author | Population | Study design 2 | Study duration (weeks) | Size (n) | Mean age (y) | Mean BMI (kg/m2) | Males (%) | BP medication | Intervention product | Dose (ml) 3 | Dose (mg flavonoids)3 | Control 4 | Baseline SBP (mmHg) | Baseline DBP (mmHg) | Quality |
| Bingham et al. 1997 | Healthy | R, S, C | 4 | 65 | 40.7 | 24.2 | 47.7 | No | Leaf tea | 1800 | 1494.0 | Water (CC) | 120.1 | 75.1 | 6 |
| Duffy et al. 2001 | CAD | R, S, C | 4 | 50 | 55.0 | 29.7 | 78.0 | Yes | Extract powder | 900 | 873.0 | Water | 137.0 | 77.0 | 6 |
| Grassi et al. 2012 | Hypertensive | R, D, C | 1 | 19 | 51.3 | 26.8 | 26.3 | No | Extract powder | 400 | 240.2 | Placebo tea (CC) | 145.6 | 92.0 | 7 |
| Grassi et al. 2009 (office) | Healthy | R, D, C | 1 | 19 | 32.9 | 23.9 | 100.0 | No | Extract powder | 400 | 375.0 | Placebo tea (CC) | 128.8 | 80.8 | 7 |
| Grassi et al. 2009 (ABPM) | Healthy | R, D, C | 1 | 19 | 32.9 | 23.9 | 100.0 | No | Extract powder | 400 | 375.0 | Placebo tea (CC) | 121.2 | 74.4 | 7 |
| Hodgson et al. 2012 | Healthy | R, D, P | 26 | 95 | 56.6 | 25.1 | 34.7 | No | Extract powder | 600 | 360.4 | Placebo tea (CC) | 122.4 | 73.1 | 7 |
| Hodgson et al. 2003 | Healthy | R, S, C | 4 | 22 | 59.0 | 27.0 | 72.7 | No | Leaf tea | 1250 | 1037.5 | Water | 121.0 | 72.0 | 5 |
| Hodgson et al. 2002 | MHC | R, S, P | 4 | 21 | 59.1 | 27.5 | 76.2 | No | Leaf tea | 1250 | 1037.5 | Water | 123.0 | 73.0 | 6 |
| Hodgson et al. 1999 | High-normal SBP | R, S, C | 1 | 13 | 59.8 | 27.0 | 76.9 | No | Leaf tea | 1000 | 830.0 | Water (CC) | 135.5 | 77.5 | 6 |
| Mukamal et al 2007 | High CVD risk | R, S, P | 26 | 28 | 65.8 | 29.1 | 35.7 | Yes | Extract powder | 600 | 318.0 | Water | 138.4 | - | 5 |
| Rakic et al 1996 | Hypertensive | R, S, P | 2 | 26 | 73.0 | 27.4 | 42.3 | Yes | Leaf tea | 1250 | 1037.5 | Water | 133.2 | 75.1 | 4 |
| Schreuder et al. 2013 | Healthy | R, S, C | 1 | 20 | 54.0 | 25.1 | 40.0 | No | Leaf tea | 600 | 498.0 | Water | 132.0 | 78.3 | 6 |
ABPM, 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring; CAD, coronary artery disease; MHC, mildly hypercholesterolemic; SBP, systolic blood pressure; CVD, cardiovascular disease; 2 R, randomized; S, single blind; C, crossover trial; D, double blind; P, parallel trial; 3 Where dose in ml tea or mg flavonoids was not reported, it was calculated according to Astill et al. [49]; 4 CC, placebo matched for caffeine content of the tea intervention.
Figure 2Net changes in SBP (A) and DBP (B) in randomized studies of black tea consumption.
Horizontal lines represent 95% confidence intervals. Grey diamonds represent the pooled estimates using fixed and random effects models respectively. Grassi et al. 2009 reported both office and ambulatory BP – both sets of data were included in the analyses, but to keep the weight of the study proportionate, the weight of each arm was halved.
Covariate analyses - effect of tea on blood pressure within and between different subgroups.
| Dichotomous covariates | Change in SBP | Change in DBP | ||||||||
| Subgroup | No. of study arms | Effect | 95% CI | P within groups | P between groups | No. of study arms | Effect | 95% CI | P within groups | P between groups |
| Type of intervention | ||||||||||
| Powder | 6 | −2.6 | (−3.5; −1.7) | <0.0001* | 0.01* | 5 | −1.7 | (−2.3; −1.0) | 0.068 | 0.095 |
| Leaf tea | 6 | −0.3 | (−1.8; 1.2) | 0.682 | 6 | −0.8 | (−1.6; 0.1) | <0.0001* | ||
| Caffeinated placebo | ||||||||||
| Yes | 6 | −1.7 | (−2.9; −0.5) | 0.005* | 0.886 | 6 | −1.5 | (−1.6; 1.0) | 0.649 | 0.09 |
| No | 6 | −1.9 | (−4.4; 0.6) | 0.131 | 5 | −0.3 | (−2.1; −1.0) | <0.0001* | ||
| Continuous covariates | SBP | DBP | ||||||||
| β | P | β | P | |||||||
| Baseline SBP/DBP (per 10 mmHg) | −0.9 | 0.01* | −1.1 | 0.04 | ||||||
| Dose (per 100 mg flavonoids) | 0.3 | 0.004* | 0.1 | 0.06 | ||||||
| Duration (per 1 week) | −0.01 | 0.820 | −0.03 | 0.34 | ||||||
| Quality score (per unit) | −1.3 | 0.08 | −1.0 | 0.02* | ||||||
Figure 3Funnel plots of trials included in the meta-analysis for (A) systolic blood pressure and (B) diastolic blood pressure.