Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Feb 29;22(3):24.
doi: 10.1007/s11906-020-1029-5.

Effect of Egg Consumption on Blood Pressure: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

Affiliations

Effect of Egg Consumption on Blood Pressure: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

Roya Kolahdouz-Mohammadi et al. Curr Hypertens Rep. .

Abstract

Purpose of review: We identified and quantified the results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that have assessed the impact of egg consumption on blood pressure in adults.

Recent findings: We conducted a comprehensive search of medical bibliographic databases up to February 2019 for RCTs investigating the effect of egg consumption on blood pressure in adults. Fifteen RCTs were included with a total of 748 participants. Overall, egg consumption had no significant effect on systolic blood pressure (weighted mean difference (WMD) = 0.046 mmHg; 95% CI - 0.792, 0.884) and diastolic blood pressure (WMD = - 0.603 mmHg; 95% CI - 1.521, 0.315). Subgroup analyses had no effect on pooled results and no heterogeneity was found among included studies. Egg consumption has no significant effects on systolic and diastolic blood pressure in adults. Due to several limitations among existing studies, general conclusions cannot be drawn regarding the beneficial or neutral impact of egg consumption on blood pressure in adults.

Keywords: Diastolic blood pressure; Egg; Meta-analysis; Systolic blood pressure.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow diagram for study selection procedure
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Forest plot showing pooled weighted mean difference with 95% CI for SBP
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Forest plot showing pooled weighted mean difference with 95% CI for DBP

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Benjamin EJ, Virani SS, Callaway CW, Chamberlain AM, Chang AR, Cheng S, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics-2018 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2018;137(12):e67–e492. - PubMed
    1. Hajjar I, Kotchen JM, Kotchen TA. Hypertension: trends in prevalence, incidence, and control. Annu Rev Public Health. 2006;27: 465–90. - PubMed
    1. GBD 2016 Risk Factors Collaborators. Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 84 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet. 2017;390:1345–422. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kearney PM, Whelton M, Reynolds K, Muntner P, Whelton PK, He J. Global burden of hypertension: analysis of worldwide data. Lancet. 2005;365:217–23. - PubMed
    1. Khanna A, Lefkowitz L, White WB. Evaluation of recent fixed-dose combination therapies in the management of hypertension. Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens. 2008;17:477–83. - PubMed

Publication types