| Literature DB >> 36014910 |
Kristin M Davis1, Kristina S Petersen2,3, Kate J Bowen2, Peter J H Jones4, Carla G Taylor5,6,7, Peter Zahradka5,6,7, Karen Letourneau7, Danielle Perera7, Angela Wilson7, Paul R Wagner1, Penny M Kris-Etherton2, Sheila G West1,2.
Abstract
Partial replacement of saturated fatty acids (SFA) with unsaturated fatty acids is recommended to reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFA), including oleic acid, are associated with lower CVD risk. Measurement of flow-mediated dilation of the brachial artery (FMD) is the gold standard for measuring endothelial function and predicts CVD risk. This study examined the effect of partially replacing SFA with MUFA from conventional canola oil and high-oleic acid canola oil on FMD. Participants (n = 31) with an elevated waist circumference plus ≥1 additional metabolic syndrome criterion completed FMD measures as part of the Canola Oil Multi-Centre Intervention Trial 2 (COMIT-2), a multi-center, double-blind, three-period crossover, controlled feeding randomized trial. Diet periods were 6 weeks, separated by ≥4-week washouts. Experimental diets were provided during all feeding periods. Diets only differed by the fatty acid profile of the oils: canola oil (CO; 17.5% energy from MUFA, 9.2% polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA), 6.6% SFA), high-oleic acid canola oil (HOCO; 19.1% MUFA, 7.0% PUFA, 6.4% SFA), and a control oil blend (CON; 11% MUFA, 10% PUFA, 12% SFA). Multilevel models were used to examine the effect of the diets on FMD. No significant between-diet differences were observed for average brachial artery diameter (CO: 6.70 ± 0.15 mm, HOCO: 6.57 ± 0.15 mm, CON: 6.73 ± 0.14 mm; p = 0.72), peak brachial artery diameter (CO: 7.11 ± 0.15 mm, HOCO: 7.02 ± 0.15 mm, CON: 6.41 ± 0.48 mm; p = 0.80), or FMD (CO: 6.32 ± 0.51%, HOCO: 6.96 ± 0.49%, CON: 6.41 ± 0.48%; p = 0.81). Partial replacement of SFA with MUFA from CO and HOCO had no effect on FMD in participants with or at risk of metabolic syndrome.Entities:
Keywords: cardiovascular disease risk; conventional canola oil; flow-mediated dilation; high-oleic canola oil
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36014910 PMCID: PMC9416081 DOI: 10.3390/nu14163404
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 6.706
Figure 1CONSORT participant flow diagram of the COMIT-2 participants for inclusion in the flow-mediated dilation analyses. COMIT, Canola Oil Multi-Centre Intervention Trial; max, maximum; FMD, flow-mediated dilation.
Macronutrient composition of the three experimental diets, including oils 1,2.
| Canola | HOCO | Control | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Carbohydrate | 50.79 | 50.79 | 50.75 |
| Protein | 15.87 | 15.87 | 15.71 |
| Fat | 35.26 | 35.26 | 35.21 |
| MUFA | 17.45 | 19.11 | 10.50 |
| Oleic Acid | 15.55 | 17.86 | 5.92 |
| PUFA | 9.21 | 7.02 | 9.96 |
| α-linolenic acid | 2.10 | 0.76 | 1.73 |
| Linoleic Acid | 6.42 | 5.56 | 7.28 |
| SFA | 6.56 | 6.43 | 12.26 |
1 Average composition of the 7-day rotating menu; est. at the 3000 kcal level using Food Processor Nutrition Analysis Software (ESHA Research; Salem, OR, USA); 2 All values presented as percentage of total energy. MUFA, monounsaturated fatty acids; PUFA, polyunsaturated fatty acids; SFA, saturated fatty acids; HOCO, high-oleic acid canola oil.
Participant characteristics at baseline.
| Starting Diet | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variable | Overall | Canola | HOCO | Control |
| Sex | ||||
| Male | 20 (67) | 9 (82) | 7 (64) | 4 (44) |
| Female | 11 (33) | 2 (18) | 4 (36) | 5 (56) |
| Anthropometric Measures | Mean ± SD | |||
| Age (years) | 43 ± 14 | 39 ± 14 | 43 ± 13 | 45 ± 14 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 32.1 ± 5.6 | 35.4 ± 7.0 | 30.0 ± 2.2 | 31.5 ± 5.5 |
| MetS Criteria | ||||
| Waist Circumference (cm) | Male: 106.9 ± 1.1 1 | 115.2 ± 1.1 1 | 99.9 ± 1.1 1 | 101.5 ± 1.1 1 |
| TG (mmol/L) | 1.6 ± 0.8 | 1.7 ± 0.7 | 1.7 ± 1.1 | 1.2 ± 0.6 |
| HDL-C (mmol/L) | Male 1.1 ± 0.3 | 1.2 ± 0.4 | 1.1 ± 0.3 | 1.2 ± 0.4 |
| Female 1.6 ± 0.4 | 1.4 ± 0.2 | 1.6 ± 0.6 | 1.7 ± 0.5 | |
| SBP (mmHg) | 125 ± 13 | 125 ± 7 | 120 ± 15 | 128 ± 16 |
| DBP (mmHg) | 86 ± 9 | 86 ± 8 | 84 ± 11 | 86 ± 9 |
| Fasting Glucose (mmol/L) | 5.3 ± 0.5 | 5.4 ± 0.5 | 5.2 ± 0.5 | 5.4 ± 0.5 |
| Met full MetS criteria * | 9 (81.8%) | 5 (50%) | 7 (77.8%) | |
| Additional CVD risk factors | ||||
| Total Cholesterol (mmol/L) | 5.1 ± 1.0 | 5.1 ± 1.2 | 5.4 ± 0.9 | 5.0 ± 0.7 |
| LDL-C (mmol/L) | 3.2 ± 0.8 | 3.1 ± 0.9 | 3.4 ± 0.9 | 3.0 ± 0.6 |
BMI, body mass index; SD, standard deviation; MetS, metabolic syndrome; TG, triglycerides; SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; CVD, cardiovascular disease; LDL-C, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; 1 geometric means and geometric standard deviations presented due to non-normally distributed variable. * To meet International Diabetes Federation definition of MetS, a person must have an elevated waist circumference, plus at least 2 additional MetS criteria, including elevated triglycerides, low HDL-C, high blood pressure, and elevated fasting glucose.
Results of multilevel models.
| Baseline | Control | Canola | HOCO |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Avg BAD (mm) | 6.55 ± 0.14 | 6.73 ± 0.14 | 6.70 ± 0.15 | 6.57 ± 0.15 | 0.72 |
| Peak BAD (mm) | 6.97 ± 0.14 | 7.14 ± 0.14 | 7.11 ± 0.15 | 7.02 ± 0.15 | 0.80 |
| FMD (% change) | 6.48 ± 0.49 | 6.41 ± 0.48 | 6.32 ± 0.51 | 6.96 ± 0.49 | 0.81 |
| Baseline Flow # | 176.7 ± 19.1 | 241.0 ± 24.9 | 246.5 ± 26.4 | 246.5 ± 26.4 | 0.72 |
| Peak Flow | 1067.8 ± 93.0 | 1168.4 ± 89.2 | 1376.6 ± 99.7 | 1307.9 ± 92.3 | 0.29 |
| RH | 503.9 ± 47.8 | 393.53 ± 46.1 | 351.1 ± 47.9 | 376.4 ± 47.9 | 0.41 |
| FMD Change from Baseline (mm) | N/A | −0.2 ± 0.6 | 0.1 ± 0.7 | 0.7 ± 0.6 | 0.62 |
# non-normally distributed variables are presented as geometric means; p values from multilevel models conducted using mixed models procedure (PROC MIXED); Avg, average; BAD, brachial artery diameter; FMD, flow-mediated dilation; RH, reactive hyperemia; N/A, not applicable.