Association Between Omega-3 Fatty Acid Levels and Risk for Incident Major Bleeding Events and Atrial Fibrillation: MESA

Omega-3 Fatty Acids and Arrhythmias

The pro- and antiarrhythmic effects of omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (n-3 PUFAs) have been extensively studied in preclinical and human trials. Despite early evidence of an antiarrhythmic role of n-3 PUFA in the prevention of sudden cardiac death and postoperative and persistent atrial fibrillation (AF), subsequent well-designed randomized trials have largely not shown an antiarrhythmic benefit. Two trials that tested moderate and high-dose n-3 PUFA demonstrated a reduction in sudden cardiac death, but these findings have not been widely replicated, and the potential of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) to reduce arrhythmic death in combination, or as monotherapy, remains uncertain. The accumulated clinical evidence does not support supplementation of n-3 PUFA for postoperative AF or secondary prevention of AF. Several large, contemporary, randomized controlled trials of high-dose n-3 PUFA for primary or secondary cardiovascular prevention have demonstrated a small, significant, dose-dependent increased risk of incident AF compared with mineral oil or corn oil comparator. These findings were reproduced with both icosapent ethyl monotherapy and a mixed EPA+DHA formulation. The proarrhythmic mechanism of increased AF in contemporary cohorts exposed to high-dose n-3 PUFA is unknown. EPA and DHA and their metabolites have pleiotropic cardiometabolic and pro- and antiarrhythmic effects, including modification of the lipid raft microenvironment; alteration of cell membrane structure and fluidity; modulation of sodium, potassium, and calcium currents; and regulation of gene transcription, cell proliferation, and inflammation. Further characterization of the complex association between EPA, EPA+DHA, and DHA and AF is needed. Which formulations, dose ranges, and patient subgroups are at highest risk, remain unclear.

Eicosapentaenoic Acid and the Outcomes in Older Patients Undergoing Atrial Fibrillation Ablation

BACKGROUND

A lower serum eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) to arachidonic acid (AA) ratio (EPA/AA) level correlates with cardiovascular events. Nevertheless, elevated serum EPA levels increase the risk of new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) in older patients. The relationship between the EPA/AA and outcomes post-AF ablation remains unclear. This study investigated the impact of the EPA/AA on AF recurrence and cardiovascular events after AF ablation in older patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This retrospective cohort study examined consecutive patients with AF aged ≥65 years who underwent a first-time AF ablation. We compared the 3-year AF recurrence and 5-year major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) rates between patients divided into high and low EPA/AA levels defined as above and below the median EPA/AA value before ablation. MACE was defined as heart failure hospitalizations, strokes, coronary artery disease, major bleeding, and cardiovascular death. Among the 673 included patients, the median EPA/AA value was 0.35. Compared with the low EPA/AA group, the high EPA/AA group had a significantly higher cumulative incidence of AF recurrence (39.3% versus 27.6%; log-rank P=0.004) and lower cumulative incidence of MACE (13.8% versus 25.5%, log-rank P=0.021). A high EPA/AA level was determined as an independent predictor of AF recurrence (hazard ratio [HR], 1.75 95% CI, 1.24-2.49; P=0.002) and MACE (HR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.36-0.99]; P=0.046).

CONCLUSIONS

The EPA/AA was associated with AF recurrence and MACE after ablation in patients with AF aged ≥65 years.

Recommendations for nutritional supplements for dry eye disease: current advances

Dry eye disease (DED) represents a prevalent ocular surface disease. The development of effective nutritional management strategies for DED is crucial due to its association with various factors such as inflammation, oxidative stress, deficiencies in polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs), imbalanced PUFA ratios, and vitamin insufficiencies. Extensive research has explored the impact of oral nutritional supplements, varying in composition and dosage, on the symptoms of DED. The main components of these supplements include fish oils (Omega-3 fatty acids), vitamins, trace elements, and phytochemical extracts. Beyond these well-known nutrients, it is necessary to explore whether novel nutrients might contribute to more effective DED management. This review provides a comprehensive update on the therapeutic potential of nutrients and presents new perspectives for combination supplements in DED treatment.

Current Evidence and Future Directions of Omega-3 Supplementation and Cardiovascular Disease Risk

Omega-3 supplementation has a controversial role in the secondary prevention of cardiovascular diseases. Despite large clinical trials published over the years, the evidence of omega-3 in preventing cardiovascular diseases, especially coronary heart disease, is still inconclusive. However, recent clinical trials using higher dose of omega-3 or highly purified esters of omega-3 shows promising result, with reduction in cardiovascular death and incidence of cardiovascular disease. This review aims to summarize the possible mechanism of omega-3 in preventing cardiovascular disease and future directions of research regarding the benefit of omega-3 in cardiovascular disease.

Do omega-3 fatty acids increase risk of atrial fibrillation?

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

To summarize the findings from recent observational follow-up studies and randomized trials of plant- and marine omega-3 fatty acids on the risk of atrial fibrillation (AF).

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent randomized cardiovascular outcome trials have indicated that supplements with marine omega-3 fatty acids may be associated with a higher risk of AF, and a meta-analysis has suggested that marine omega-3 fatty acid supplements were associated with a 25% higher relative risk of AF. Also, a recent large observational study reported a modest higher risk of AF in habitual users of marine omega-3 fatty acid supplements. However, recent observational biomarker studies of circulating and adipose tissue content of marine omega-3 fatty acids have in contrast reported a lower risk of AF. Very limited knowledge exists on the role of plant-derived omega-3 fatty acids and AF.

SUMMARY

Marine omega-3 fatty acid supplements may increase the risk of AF, whereas biomarkers reflecting consumption of marine omega-3 fatty acids have been linked to a lower risk of AF. Clinicians should inform patients that marine omega-3 fatty acid supplement may increase AF risk, and this should be taking into account when discussing pros and cons of taking supplements with marine omega-3 fatty acids.

Pros and Cons of Long-Chain Omega-3 Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids in Cardiovascular Health

The long-chain omega-3 fatty acids, eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), are found in seafood, supplements, and concentrated pharmaceutical preparations. Prospective cohort studies demonstrate an association between higher intakes of EPA+DHA or higher levels of EPA and DHA in the body and lower risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD), especially coronary heart disease and myocardial infarction, and of cardiovascular mortality in the general population. The cardioprotective effect of EPA and DHA is due to the beneficial modulation of a number of risk factors for CVD. Some large trials support the use of EPA+DHA (or EPA alone) in high-risk patients, although the evidence is inconsistent. This review presents key studies of EPA and DHA in the primary and secondary prevention of CVD, briefly describes potential mechanisms of action, and discusses recently published RCTs and meta-analyses. Potential adverse aspects of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids in relation to CVD are discussed.

Investigating the Regulatory Process, Safety, Efficacy and Product Transparency for Nutraceuticals in the USA, Europe and Australia

Increased numbers of patients with chronic conditions use nutraceuticals or food-based therapeutics. However, to date, there is no global consensus on the regulatory processes for nutraceuticals. With the increased use, issues of quality and safety have also arisen. This review summarises the current regulations held for nutraceuticals in the USA, European and Australian jurisdictions using regulatory authority sites and databases. The efficacy and safety concerns, product development, gaps in regulation and challenges in ensuring product authenticity are also summarised. The data highlight the complexity that the globalisation of nutraceuticals brings with respect to challenges in regulation and associated claims regarding efficacy and safety. The development of an effective system with integrity is needed to increase vertical collaboration between consumers, healthcare practitioners, and government agencies and the development of international risk assessment criteria and botanical compendia. This will help in greater transparency and improved trust in the process and products. Emerging technologies could play a role in improving systems engineering by information sharing and leveraging the strengths of different countries. In conclusion, nutraceuticals have been poorly regulated leading to spurious claims based on little or no real evidence. This makes it difficult to separate meaningful results from poor data. More stringent regulation and an effective system of integrity are required to ensure efficacy and safety and enable the adequate monitoring and increase consumer and healthcare professionals' confidence.

Update on Omega-3 Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids on Cardiovascular Health

Twenty percent of deaths in the United States are secondary to cardiovascular diseases (CVD). In patients with hyperlipidemia and hypertriglyceridemia, studies have shown high atherosclerotic CVD (ASCVD) event rates despite the use of statins. Given the association of high triglyceride (TG) levels with elevated cholesterol and low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, the American Heart Association (AHA)/American College of Cardiology (ACC) cholesterol guidelines recommend using elevated TGs as a "risk-enhancing factor" for ASCVD and using omega 3 fatty acids (Ω3FAs) for patients with persistently elevated severe hypertriglyceridemia. Ω3FA, or fish oils (FOs), have been shown to reduce very high TG levels, hospitalizations, and CVD mortality in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We have published the largest meta-analysis to date demonstrating significant effects on several CVD outcomes, especially fatal myocardial infarctions (MIs) and total MIs. Despite the most intensive research on Ω3FAs on CVD, their benefits have been demonstrated to cluster across multiple systems and pathologies, including autoimmune diseases, infectious diseases, chronic kidney disease, central nervous system diseases, and, most recently, the COVID-19 pandemic. A review and summary of the controversies surrounding Ω3FAs, some of the latest evidence-based findings, and the current and most updated recommendations on Ω3FAs are presented in this paper.

Big Fish or No Fish; Eicosapentaenoic Acid and Cardiovascular Disease

Benefits of omega 3 fatty acids for cardiovascular and other diseases have been touted for more than 50 years. The one clear clinical benefit of these lipids is the reduction of circulating levels of triglycerides, making them a useful approach for the prevention of pancreatitis in severely hypertriglyceridemic patients. After a series of spectacularly failed clinical trials that were criticized for the choice of subjects and doses of omega 3 fatty acids used, Reduction of Cardiovascular Events with Icosapent Ethyl-Intervention Trial (REDUCE-IT) using a high dose of icosapent ethyl (IPE) reported a reduction in cardiovascular disease (CVD) events. However, this trial has generated controversy due to the use of mineral oil in the control group and the associated side effects of the IPA. This review will focus on the following topics: What are the epidemiologic data suggesting a benefit of omega 3 fatty acids? What might be the mechanisms for these benefits? Why have the clinical trials failed to resolve whether these fatty acids provide benefit? What choices should a clinician consider?