| Literature DB >> 34900035 |
Małgorzata A Dobrzyńska1, Juliusz Przysławski1.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Cold-pressed camelina oil (Camelina sativa) is rich in polyunsaturated fatty acids and may have a beneficial effect on the reduction of cardiovascular risk.Entities:
Keywords: camelina oil; canola oil; cardiovascular disease; dyslipidaemia; lipid profile
Year: 2020 PMID: 34900035 PMCID: PMC8641515 DOI: 10.5114/aoms.2020.94033
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arch Med Sci ISSN: 1734-1922 Impact factor: 3.318
Composition of selected groups of fatty acids in test oils (%)
| Variable | Camelina oil | Canola oil |
|---|---|---|
| Saturated fatty acids | 10.3 | 7.6 |
| Monosaturated fatty acids | 33.8 | 61.6 |
| Polyunsaturated fatty acids | 55.8 | 30.2 |
| n-3 | 33.2 | 9.5 |
| n-6 | 22.1 | 21.7 |
| n-9 | 30.3 | 59.1 |
| α-linolenic acid | 35.3 | 12.7 |
| Linoleic acid | 16.9 | 17.5 |
| Oleic acid | 16 | 57.9 |
Characteristic of study subject
| Parameter | Camelina oil | Canola oil | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pretrial period ( | After intervention ( | Pretrial period ( | After intervention ( | ||||
| Age [years] | 55 ±5 | 57 ±4 | |||||
| Weight [kg] | 71.4 ±15.6 | 71.2 ±15.0 | 0.9713 | 70.0 ±16.5 | 69.9 ±16.0 | 0.5481 | |
| Height [cm] | 163 ±5 | 161 ±5 | |||||
| BMI [kg/m2] | 26.7 ±5.3 | 26.7 ±5.04 | 0.8664 | 26.9 ±6.4 | 26.8 ±6.17 | 0.5481 | |
| Waist circumference [cm] | 91.2 ±14.9 | 90.2 ±14.1 | 0.0049 | 89.6 ±13.2 | 88.9 ±13.0 | 0.0158 | |
| Hip circumference [cm] | 102 ±11 | 102 ±10.6 | 0.4755 | 102 ±13 | 102 ±13.5 | 0.0995 | |
| WHR | 0.89 ±0.06 | 0.88 ±0.6 | 0.0166[ | 0.87 ±0.04 | 0.87 ±0.5 | 0.1102[ | |
| FM (%) | 35.6 ±7.2 | 35.5 ±6.71 | 0.5146[ | 36.1 ±6.38 | 36.9 ±7.2 | 0.8287 | |
| Systolic blood pressure [mm Hg] | 131 ±15 | 129 ±12 | 0.2907[ | 126 ±13 | 125 ±14 | 0.6498 | |
| Diastolic blood pressure [mm Hg] | 79 ±11 | 77 ±9 | 0.1969 | 78 ±7 | 75 ±7 | 0.9018[ | |
| TC [mg/dl] | 242 ±34.1 | 223 ±37.8 | 0.0002 | 239 ±32.8 | 225 ±36.3 | 0.0055[ | 0.3952 |
| LDL-C [mg/dl] | 147 ±32.1 | 132 ±35.0 | < 0.00001[ | 146 ±35.8 | 135 ±39.6 | 0.0050[ | 0.3606 |
| HDL-C [mg/dl] | 69.4 ±15.2 | 68.1 ±14.2 | 0.2805[ | 71.8 ±19.4 | 72.0 ±19.3 | 0.7071 | 0.5493 |
| TG [mg/dl] | 125 ±77.8 | 116 ±53.8 | 0.4427 | 105 ±41.6 | 93.9 ±32.0 | 0.0472 | 0.6204[ |
| Non-HDL-C [mg/dl] | 173 ±36.4 | 155 ±37 | 0.0001[ | 167 ±37.6 | 153 ±43.6 | 0.0043[ | 0.5456 |
Wilcoxon signed-rank test
Student’s t-test for two dependent groups
Mann-Whitney U test
Student’s t-test for two independent groups
Cochran-Cox test
BMI – body mass index, WHR – waist-to-hip ratio, FM – fat mass, TC – total cholesterol, LDL-C – low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, HDL-C – high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, TG – triglycerides.
Energy and selected nutrient composition of diet before and during the intervention
| Parameter | Pretrial period ( | Camelina oil ( | Canola oil ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Energy [kcal/day] | 2157 ±401 | 2144 ±401 | 2170 ±416 | 0.5298[ |
| Fat (E %) | 39.1 ±5.3 | 39.0 ±5.8 | 39.1 ±4.9 | 0.7747[ |
| Saturated fatty acids (E %) | 12.5 ±3.6 | 13.2 ±4.0 | 11.9 ±2.9 | 0.4142 |
| Monosaturated fatty acids (E %) | 15.5 ±2.6 | 15.4 ±2.9 | 15.5 ±2.4 | 0.0001 |
| Polyunsaturated fatty acids (E %) | 7.6 ±2.8 | 6.9 ±2.0 | 8.3 ±3.3 | 0.0067[ |
| Protein (E %) | 15.4 ±2.3 | 15.3 ±2.3 | 15.5 ±2.4 | 0.8349 |
| Carbohydrates (E %) | 49.2 ±6.1 | 49.3 ±6.6 | 49.0 ±5.7 | 0.9357 |
| Fibre [g/day] | 24.0 ±7.6 | 25.6 ±6.5 | 25.2 ±8.1 | 0.8086 |
| Cholesterol [mg/day] | 461.2 ±218.7 | 353.6 ±141.5 | 357.1 ±198.5 | 0.6843[ |
Mann-Whitney U test
Student’s t-test for two independent groups
Cochran-Cox test, E % – percentage of energy.
Figure 1Changes in the energy (%) from SFA, MUFA, PUFA, and EFA in the diet during the dietary intervention
SFA – saturated fatty acids, MUFA – monounsaturated fatty acids, PUFA – polyunsaturated fatty acids, EFA – essential fatty acids
The age, BMI value, and smoking status and their influence on the change in the lipid profile parameters
| Parameter | Camelina oil Pretrial period vs. after intervention ( | Canola oil Pretrial period vs. after intervention ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | vs. | change in TC | 0.6469 | 0.5072 |
| vs. | change in HDL-C | 0.5852 | 0.1655 | |
| vs. | change in LDL-C | 0.9217 | 0.1543 | |
| vs. | change in TG | 0.5317 | 0.1115 | |
| BMI value | vs. | change in TC | 0.4112 | 0.6324 |
| vs. | change in HDL-C | 0.1577 | 0.0670 | |
| vs. | change in LDL-C | 0.5482 | 0.6903 | |
| vs. | change in TG | 0.5111 | 0.6799 | |
| Smoking | vs. | change in TC | 0.6942 | 0.3371 |
| vs. | change in HDL-C | 0.5433 | 0.7372 | |
| vs. | change in LDL-C | 0.7871 | 0.2939 | |
| vs. | change in TG | 0.3141 | 0.5598 | |
Spearman-rank correlation
Pearson correlation
Mann-Whitney U test
Student’s t-test for two independent groups
TC – total cholesterol, LDL-C – low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, HDL-C – high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, TG – triglycerides.